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 *

96 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 854161)

  • 1. Interhemispheric sharing of signals and responses and the psychological refractory period.
    Guiard Y; Requin J
    Neuropsychologia; 1977; 15(3):427-38. PubMed ID: 854161
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Action-effect codes in and before the central bottleneck: evidence from the psychological refractory period paradigm.
    Paelecke M; Kunde W
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2007 Jun; 33(3):627-44. PubMed ID: 17563226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Revisiting the development of time sharing using a dual motor task performance.
    Getchell N; Pabreja P
    Res Q Exerc Sport; 2006 Mar; 77(1):131-6. PubMed ID: 16646360
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. General cognitive ability and the psychological refractory period: individual differences in the mind's bottleneck.
    Lee JJ; Chabris CF
    Psychol Sci; 2013 Jul; 24(7):1226-33. PubMed ID: 23744874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Queuing network modeling of the psychological refractory period (PRP).
    Wu C; Liu Y
    Psychol Rev; 2008 Oct; 115(4):913-54. PubMed ID: 18954209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Cognitive neuroscience: searching for the bottleneck in the brain.
    Spence C
    Curr Biol; 2008 Oct; 18(20):R965-8. PubMed ID: 18957255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Isolating component processes of posterror slowing with the psychological refractory period paradigm.
    Steinhauser M; Ernst B; Ibald KW
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2017 Apr; 43(4):653-659. PubMed ID: 27709985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. How Social and Refractory Is the Social Psychological Refractory Period?
    Wühr P; Heuer H
    Exp Psychol; 2017 Jul; 64(4):273-281. PubMed ID: 28922997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The source of execution-related dual-task interference: motor bottleneck or response monitoring?
    Bratzke D; Rolke B; Ulrich R
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Oct; 35(5):1413-26. PubMed ID: 19803646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Response grouping in the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm: models and contamination effects.
    Ulrich R; Miller J
    Cogn Psychol; 2008 Sep; 57(2):75-121. PubMed ID: 18262510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Cerebral refractory period of visual evoked potentials following total field and foveal stimulation].
    Gerhard H; Jörg J; Friesacher H
    EEG EMG Z Elektroenzephalogr Elektromyogr Verwandte Geb; 1985 Jun; 16(2):81-6. PubMed ID: 3930216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The cost of serially chaining two cognitive operations.
    Fan Z; Singh K; Muthukumaraswamy S; Sigman M; Dehaene S; Shapiro K
    Psychol Res; 2012 Sep; 76(5):566-78. PubMed ID: 21877138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Asymmetric interference in concurrent time-to-contact estimation: Cousin or twin of the psychological refractory period effect?
    Baurès R; DeLucia PR; Olson M; Oberfeld D
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2017 Feb; 79(2):698-711. PubMed ID: 27896708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Response-specific sources of dual-task interference in human pre-motor cortex.
    Marois R; Larson JM; Chun MM; Shima D
    Psychol Res; 2006 Nov; 70(6):436-47. PubMed ID: 16283409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. On the optimality of serial and parallel processing in the psychological refractory period paradigm: effects of the distribution of stimulus onset asynchronies.
    Miller J; Ulrich R; Rolke B
    Cogn Psychol; 2009 May; 58(3):273-310. PubMed ID: 19281972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Stopping while going! Response inhibition does not suffer dual-task interference.
    Yamaguchi M; Logan GD; Bissett PG
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2012 Feb; 38(1):123-34. PubMed ID: 21574740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Prestimulus interhemispheric coupling of brain rhythms predicts cognitive-motor performance in healthy humans.
    Vecchio F; Lacidogna G; Miraglia F; Bramanti P; Ferreri F; Rossini PM
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2014 Sep; 26(9):1883-90. PubMed ID: 24666162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A startling acoustic stimulus interferes with upcoming motor preparation: Evidence for a startle refractory period.
    Maslovat D; Chua R; Carlsen AN; May C; Forgaard CJ; Franks IM
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2015 Jun; 158():36-42. PubMed ID: 25919668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sex differences in visual half-field superiority as a function of responding hand and motor demands.
    Heister G
    Prog Brain Res; 1984; 61():457-68. PubMed ID: 6528032
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Exceptions to the PRP effect? A comparison of prepared and unconditioned reflexes.
    Janczyk M; Pfister R; Wallmeier G; Kunde W
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2014 May; 40(3):776-86. PubMed ID: 24417329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.