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 *

129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7329244)

  • 1. Expectancy and frequency effects on perceptual and motor systems in choice reaction time.
    Miller J; Anbar R
    Mem Cognit; 1981 Nov; 9(6):631-41. PubMed ID: 7329244
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of visual and auditory noise on visual choice reaction time in a continuous-flow paradigm.
    Stoffels EJ; van der Molen MW
    Percept Psychophys; 1988 Jul; 44(1):7-14. PubMed ID: 3405732
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Priming is not necessary for selective-attention failures: semantic effects of unattended, unprimed letters.
    Miller J
    Percept Psychophys; 1987 May; 41(5):419-34. PubMed ID: 3601624
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The letter-frequency effect and the generality of familiarity effects on perception.
    Appelman IB; Mayzner MS
    Percept Psychophys; 1981 Nov; 30(5):436-46. PubMed ID: 7036082
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Expectancy and dual-task interference.
    Lansman M; Farr S; Hunt E
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 1984 Apr; 10(2):195-204. PubMed ID: 6232339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. On the robustness of the additive factors stage structure in blocked and mixed choice reaction designs.
    Van Duren LL; Sanders AF
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 1988 Oct; 69(1):83-94. PubMed ID: 3245478
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The changing pattern of perceptual analytic strategies and response selection with practice in a two-choice reaction time task.
    Fletcher B; Rabbitt PM
    Q J Exp Psychol; 1978 Aug; 30(3):417-27. PubMed ID: 693787
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of stimulus degradation on category search.
    Prinz W; Meinecke C; Hielscher M
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 1987 Feb; 64(2):187-206. PubMed ID: 3591450
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Hemispheric differences on sequential effects in a choice reaction task.
    Possamaï CA
    Neuropsychologia; 1981; 19(6):775-9. PubMed ID: 7329523
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Lexical ambiguity and its role in models of word recognition.
    Simpson GB
    Psychol Bull; 1984 Sep; 96(2):316-40. PubMed ID: 6385046
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Perceptual enhancement: persistent effects of an experience.
    Jacoby LL
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1983 Jan; 9(1):21-38. PubMed ID: 6220114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Auditory emotional cues enhance visual perception.
    Zeelenberg R; Bocanegra BR
    Cognition; 2010 Apr; 115(1):202-6. PubMed ID: 20096407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effects of target luminance and cue validity on the latency of visual detection.
    Hawkins HL; Shafto MG; Richardson K
    Percept Psychophys; 1988 Nov; 44(5):484-92. PubMed ID: 3226899
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Search for a matching or mismatching letter pair.
    Krueger LE; Shapiro RG
    Percept Psychophys; 1982 May; 31(5):484-92. PubMed ID: 7110907
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Absence of a redundant-signals effect in a reaction time task with divided attention.
    Grice GR; Canham L; Gwynne JW
    Percept Psychophys; 1984 Dec; 36(6):565-70. PubMed ID: 6535102
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A probabilistic model for the discrimination of visual number.
    van Oeffelen MP; Vos PG
    Percept Psychophys; 1982 Aug; 32(2):163-70. PubMed ID: 7145586
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Visual texture segregation based on orientation and hue.
    Callaghan TC; Lasaga MI; Garner WR
    Percept Psychophys; 1986 Jan; 39(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 3703659
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Response specific temporal expectancy: evidence from a variable foreperiod paradigm.
    Thomaschke R; Kiesel A; Hoffmann J
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2011 Oct; 73(7):2309-22. PubMed ID: 21755419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Levels of processing in disruptive effects of prior information.
    Neill WT
    Mem Cognit; 1985 Nov; 13(6):477-84. PubMed ID: 3831704
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Single-letter recognition accuracy benefits from advance cuing of location.
    Van der Heijden AH; Wolters G; Groep JC; Hagenaar R
    Percept Psychophys; 1987 Nov; 42(5):503-9. PubMed ID: 3696944
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.