122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7385922)
1. [Basics of the figure recognition experiment].
Drösler J
Z Exp Angew Psychol; 1980; 27(1):1-25. PubMed ID: 7385922
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Reassessing the automaticity-control distinction: item recognition as a paradigm case.
Ryan C
Psychol Rev; 1983 Apr; 90(2):171-8. PubMed ID: 6867218
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Putting properties of objects in context: reply to Nickerson.
Crist WB
J Exp Psychol Gen; 1981 Sep; 110(3):303-5. PubMed ID: 6457079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Empirical study on figure recognition of normal hearing and hard of hearing children].
Reimann B
Z Psychol Z Angew Psychol; 1983; 191(1):33-49. PubMed ID: 6137911
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. An apparatus for automating object discriminations with pigeons.
Cabe PA
Percept Mot Skills; 1980 Jun; 50(3 Pt 1):815-8. PubMed ID: 7402863
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of pleasant and unpleasant verbal stimuli upon perceptual learning in young children.
Hardy PA; Sommer R
Percept Mot Skills; 1984 Feb; 58(1):91-9. PubMed ID: 6718206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Familiarity and visual change detection.
Pashler H
Percept Psychophys; 1988 Oct; 44(4):369-78. PubMed ID: 3226885
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Stability of whole vs part perceptions of visual stimuli.
Scruggs TE; Mastropieri MA; Monson JA; Wade JP
Percept Mot Skills; 1984 Oct; 59(2):547-50. PubMed ID: 6514501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Is figural perception indeed additive?].
Drösler J
Z Exp Angew Psychol; 1986; 33(3):351-9. PubMed ID: 3751161
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Quantitative and structural factors in the judgment of pattern complexity.
Ichikawa S
Percept Psychophys; 1985 Aug; 38(2):101-9. PubMed ID: 4088801
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Two techniques for investigating perception without awareness.
Duncan J
Percept Psychophys; 1985 Sep; 38(3):296-8. PubMed ID: 4088823
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Factors responsible for performance on the day-night task: response set or semantics?
Simpson A; Riggs KJ
Dev Sci; 2005 Jul; 8(4):360-71. PubMed ID: 15985070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Flower or rose? Differences in visual information processing of experts and amateurs].
Zimmer HD
Arch Psychol (Frankf); 1984; 136(4):343-61. PubMed ID: 6535539
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. [Context effects in the identification of pictures : suggestive preinformation].
Gerling M
Z Exp Angew Psychol; 1980; 27(2):193-212. PubMed ID: 7395274
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Inhibitory competition between shape properties in figure-ground perception.
Peterson MA; Skow E
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2008 Apr; 34(2):251-67. PubMed ID: 18377169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Set size effects in the macaque striate cortex.
Landman R; Spekreijse H; Lamme VA
J Cogn Neurosci; 2003 Aug; 15(6):873-82. PubMed ID: 14511540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Shape-specific perceptual learning in a figure-ground segregation task.
Yi DJ; Olson IR; Chun MM
Vision Res; 2006 Mar; 46(6-7):914-24. PubMed ID: 16242752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Perception of line patterns under the influence of successive and simultaneous interference].
Gerber A
Z Exp Angew Psychol; 1980; 27(1):84-98. PubMed ID: 7385928
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Children's use of perceptual set.
Day MC; Stone CA
J Exp Child Psychol; 1980 Jun; 29(3):428-45. PubMed ID: 7373213
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Pictures and names: making the connection.
Jolicoeur P; Gluck MA; Kosslyn SM
Cogn Psychol; 1984 Apr; 16(2):243-75. PubMed ID: 6734136
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
