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 *

94 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7121248)

  • 1. Lateral inhibition and echoic memory: some comments on Crowder's (1978) theory.
    Watkins OC; Watkins MJ
    Mem Cognit; 1982 May; 10(3):279-86. PubMed ID: 7121248
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Does echoic memory develop?
    Engle RW; Fidler DS; Reynolds LH
    J Exp Child Psychol; 1981 Dec; 32(3):459-73. PubMed ID: 7320680
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Auditory and visual sequential memory of Down syndrome and nonretarded children.
    Marcell MM; Armstrong V
    Am J Ment Defic; 1982 Jul; 87(1):86-95. PubMed ID: 6214953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Reduced top-down influence in auditory perceptual organization in schizophrenia.
    Silverstein SM; Matteson S; Knight RA
    J Abnorm Psychol; 1996 Nov; 105(4):663-7. PubMed ID: 8952201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Serial-pattern structure and temporal-order recognition.
    Boltz M; Marshburn E; Jones MR; Johnson WW
    Percept Psychophys; 1985 Mar; 37(3):209-17. PubMed ID: 4022750
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Representation of speech sounds in precategorical acoustic storage.
    Crowder RG
    J Exp Psychol; 1973 Apr; 98(1):14-24. PubMed ID: 4704206
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Suffix effects and probe modality in probed recall: implications for readout from sensory memory.
    Penney CG
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 1982 May; 34(Pt 2):245-57. PubMed ID: 7202243
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Reporting words from the eye or the ear: to write or to speak?
    Morris N; Jones DM
    Ergonomics; 1987 Apr; 30(4):665-74. PubMed ID: 3608971
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Synchronized brain activity during rehearsal and short-term memory disruption by irrelevant speech is affected by recall mode.
    Kopp F; Schröger E; Lipka S
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2006 Aug; 61(2):188-203. PubMed ID: 16298003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The role of memory in attenuations of the suffix effect.
    Frick RW
    Mem Cognit; 1988 Jan; 16(1):15-22. PubMed ID: 3339995
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Ordering and reordering in the auditory and visual modalities.
    Metcalfe J; Sharpe D
    Mem Cognit; 1985 Sep; 13(5):435-41. PubMed ID: 4088053
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Segregation of study items in memory determines the magnitude and direction of directed forgetting.
    Icht M; Chajut E; Algom D
    Br J Psychol; 2013 Feb; 104(1):83-96. PubMed ID: 23320444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of performance of eight-year-old children on three auditory sequential memory tests.
    Chermak GD; O'Connell VI
    Percept Mot Skills; 1981 Jun; 52(3):879-82. PubMed ID: 7267261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sequence of information and processing strategies in oral language.
    Wold AH
    Scand J Psychol; 1982; 23(4):267-72. PubMed ID: 7156912
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Organizational factors in the effect of irrelevant speech: the role of spatial location and timing.
    Jones DM; Macken WJ
    Mem Cognit; 1995 Mar; 23(2):192-200. PubMed ID: 7731364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Some suffix effects on lipread lists.
    Campbell R; Dodd B
    Can J Psychol; 1982 Sep; 36(3):508-14. PubMed ID: 7172134
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Interference in memory by process or content? A reply to Neath (2000).
    Jones DM; Tremblay S
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2000 Sep; 7(3):550-8. PubMed ID: 11082864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.