These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6232343)

  • 1. Convenient fixation location within isolated words of different length and structure.
    O'Regan JK; Lévy-Schoen A; Pynte J; Brugaillère B
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1984 Apr; 10(2):250-7. PubMed ID: 6232343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Re-evaluating split-fovea processing in word recognition: effects of fixation location within words.
    Jordan TR; Paterson KB; Kurtev S; Xu M
    Cortex; 2010 Mar; 46(3):298-309. PubMed ID: 19576580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Dissociating spatial and letter-based word length effects observed in readers' eye movement patterns.
    Hautala J; Hyönä J; Aro M
    Vision Res; 2011 Aug; 51(15):1719-27. PubMed ID: 21664920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Word ambiguity and the optimal viewing position in reading.
    Clark JJ; O'Regan JK
    Vision Res; 1999 Feb; 39(4):843-57. PubMed ID: 10341970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of parafoveal word length and orthographic features on initial fixation landing positions in reading.
    Plummer P; Rayner K
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2012 Jul; 74(5):950-63. PubMed ID: 22391893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Binocular fixation disparity in single word displays.
    Paterson KB; Jordan TR; Kurtev S
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Dec; 35(6):1961-8. PubMed ID: 19968446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Eye fixations are influenced by the distribution of information within words.
    Underwood G; Clews S; Wilkinson H
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 1989 Dec; 72(3):263-80. PubMed ID: 2618793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. How strongly do word reading times and lexical decision times correlate? Combining data from eye movement corpora and megastudies.
    Kuperman V; Drieghe D; Keuleers E; Brysbaert M
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2013; 66(3):563-80. PubMed ID: 22524868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: effects of word frequency.
    Inhoff AW; Rayner K
    Percept Psychophys; 1986 Dec; 40(6):431-9. PubMed ID: 3808910
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. On the role of refixations in letter strings: the influence of oculomotor factors.
    Nazir TA
    Percept Psychophys; 1991 Apr; 49(4):373-89. PubMed ID: 2030935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Aging and the optimal viewing position effect in visual word recognition: Evidence from English.
    Li L; Li S; Wang J; McGowan VA; Liu P; Jordan TR; Paterson KB
    Psychol Aging; 2017 Jun; 32(4):367-376. PubMed ID: 28406653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluating hemispheric divisions in processing fixated words: the evidence from Arabic.
    Jordan TR; Almabruk AA; McGowan VA; Paterson KB
    Cortex; 2011 Sep; 47(8):992-7. PubMed ID: 21457952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Reading sentences of words with rotated letters: An eye movement study.
    Blythe HI; Juhasz BJ; Tbaily LW; Rayner K; Liversedge SP
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2019 Jul; 72(7):1790-1804. PubMed ID: 30328773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluating a split processing model of visual word recognition: effects of word length.
    Lavidor M; Ellis AW; Shillcock R; Bland T
    Brain Res Cogn Brain Res; 2001 Oct; 12(2):265-72. PubMed ID: 11587895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. From word superiority to word inferiority: visual processing of letters and words in pure alexia.
    Habekost T; Petersen A; Behrmann M; Starrfelt R
    Cogn Neuropsychol; 2014; 31(5-6):413-36. PubMed ID: 24801564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The acquisition of parafoveal word information in reading.
    Blanchard HE; Pollatsek A; Rayner K
    Percept Psychophys; 1989 Jul; 46(1):85-94. PubMed ID: 2755766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. On the optimal viewing position for object processing.
    van der Linden L; Vitu F
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2016 Feb; 78(2):602-17. PubMed ID: 26584904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Re-evaluating split-fovea processing in word recognition: effects of word length.
    Jordan TR; Paterson KB; Stachurski M
    Cortex; 2009 Apr; 45(4):495-505. PubMed ID: 19231478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparing naming, lexical decision, and eye fixation times: word frequency effects and individual differences.
    Schilling HH; Rayner K; Chumbley JI
    Mem Cognit; 1998 Nov; 26(6):1270-81. PubMed ID: 9847550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A New Font, Specifically Designed for Peripheral Vision, Improves Peripheral Letter and Word Recognition, but Not Eye-Mediated Reading Performance.
    Bernard JB; Aguilar C; Castet E
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(4):e0152506. PubMed ID: 27074013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.