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 *

100 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7087781)

  • 1. Modality and phonological similarity effects in serial recall: does one's own voice play a role?
    Gathercole SE; Gardiner JM; Gregg VH
    Mem Cognit; 1982 Mar; 10(2):176-80. PubMed ID: 7087781
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. When does between-sequence phonological similarity promote irrelevant sound disruption?
    Marsh JE; Vachon F; Jones DM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 Jan; 34(1):243-8. PubMed ID: 18194067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Modality effects: do they fall on deaf ears?
    Engle RW; Cantor J
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 1989 May; 41(2):273-92. PubMed ID: 2748932
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The phonological loop and the irrelevant speech effect: some comments on Neath (2000).
    Baddeley AD
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2000 Sep; 7(3):544-9. PubMed ID: 11082863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Overlap of phonetic features as a determinant of the between-stream phonological similarity effect.
    Eagan DE; Chein JM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2012 Mar; 38(2):473-81. PubMed ID: 21928935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Perceptual-gestural (mis)mapping in serial short-term memory: the impact of talker variability.
    Hughes RW; Marsh JE; Jones DM
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Nov; 35(6):1411-25. PubMed ID: 19857013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Dissociable lexical and phonological influences on serial recognition and serial recall.
    Gathercole SE; Pickering SJ; Hall M; Peaker SM
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2001 Feb; 54(1):1-30. PubMed ID: 11216312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Examining the relationship between immediate serial recall and immediate free recall: common effects of phonological loop variables but only limited evidence for the phonological loop.
    Spurgeon J; Ward G; Matthews WJ
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2014 Jul; 40(4):1110-41. PubMed ID: 24564540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Auditory word serial recall benefits from orthographic dissimilarity.
    Pattamadilok C; Lafontaine H; Morais J; Kolinsky R
    Lang Speech; 2010; 53(Pt 3):321-41. PubMed ID: 21033650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of phonological similarity and concurrent irrelevant articulation on short-term-memory recall of repeated and novel word lists.
    Coltheart V
    Mem Cognit; 1993 Jul; 21(4):539-45. PubMed ID: 8350745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Phonological working memory in German children with poor reading and spelling abilities.
    Steinbrink C; Klatte M
    Dyslexia; 2008 Nov; 14(4):271-90. PubMed ID: 17979186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Some evidence for 'speech' as an acoustic feature.
    Morton J; Chambers SM
    Br J Psychol; 1976 Feb; 67(1):31-45. PubMed ID: 1268450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Dissimilar items benefit from phonological similarity in serial recall.
    Farrell S; Lewandowsky S
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2003 Sep; 29(5):838-49. PubMed ID: 14516217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Serial recall of poor readers in two presentation modalities: combined effects of phonological similarity and word length.
    Irausquin RS; de Gelder B
    J Exp Child Psychol; 1997 Jun; 65(3):342-69. PubMed ID: 9178964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Not so fast! Talker variability in serial recall at standard presentation rates.
    Mogensen C; Miller LM; Roodenrys S
    Can J Exp Psychol; 2015 Mar; 69(1):39-53. PubMed ID: 25730639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Retroactive effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall from short-term memory.
    Norris D; Baddeley AD; Page MP
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2004 Sep; 30(5):1093-105. PubMed ID: 15355138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of tactual and phonological similarity on the recall of Braille letters by blind children.
    Millar S
    Br J Psychol; 1975 May; 66(2):193-201. PubMed ID: 1156741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The phonological-similarity effect differentiates between two working memory tasks.
    MacAndrew DK; Klatzky RL; Fiez JA; McClelland JL; Becke JT
    Psychol Sci; 2002 Sep; 13(5):465-8. PubMed ID: 12219815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Inverting the modality effect in serial recall.
    Beaman CP
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2002 Apr; 55(2):371-89. PubMed ID: 12047050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Is the phonological loop responsible for intelligence-related differences in forward digit span?
    Conners FA; Carr MD; Willis S
    Am J Ment Retard; 1998 Jul; 103(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 9678225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.