190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8961817)
1. Cuing effects in short-term recall.
Tehan G; Humphreys MS
Mem Cognit; 1996 Nov; 24(6):719-32. PubMed ID: 8961817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Transient phonemic codes and immunity to proactive interference.
Tehan G; Humphreys MS
Mem Cognit; 1995 Mar; 23(2):181-91. PubMed ID: 7731363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Proactive interference and cuing effects in short-term cued recall: does foil context matter?
Goh WD; Tan H
Mem Cognit; 2006 Jul; 34(5):1063-79. PubMed ID: 17128605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Creating proactive interference in immediate recall: building a dog from a dart, a mop, and a fig.
Tehan G; Humphreys MS
Mem Cognit; 1998 May; 26(3):477-89. PubMed ID: 9610119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Intelligence as the efficiency of cue-driven retrieval from secondary memory.
Liesefeld HR; Hoffmann E; Wentura D
Memory; 2016; 24(3):285-94. PubMed ID: 25626154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Proactive interference and item similarity in working memory.
Bunting M
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Mar; 32(2):183-196. PubMed ID: 16569140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Part-set cuing of false memories.
Reysen MB; Nairne JS
Psychon Bull Rev; 2002 Jun; 9(2):389-93. PubMed ID: 12120805
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Working memory capacity and retrieval limitations from long-term memory: an examination of differences in accessibility.
Unsworth N; Spillers GJ; Brewer GA
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(12):2397-410. PubMed ID: 22800472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Part-list cuing with and without item-specific probes: the role of encoding.
Aslan A; Bäuml KH
Psychon Bull Rev; 2007 Jun; 14(3):489-94. PubMed ID: 17874594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Support for an auto-associative model of spoken cued recall: evidence from fMRI.
de Zubicaray G; McMahon K; Eastburn M; Pringle AJ; Lorenz L; Humphreys MS
Neuropsychologia; 2007 Mar; 45(4):824-35. PubMed ID: 16989874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Immunity to proactive interference is not a property of the focus of attention in working memory.
Ralph A; Walters JN; Stevens A; Fitzgerald KJ; Tehan G; Surprenant AM; Neath I; Turcotte J
Mem Cognit; 2011 Feb; 39(2):217-30. PubMed ID: 21264609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Part-list cuing effects in children: A developmental dissociation between the detrimental and beneficial effect.
John T; Aslan A
J Exp Child Psychol; 2018 Feb; 166():705-712. PubMed ID: 28943058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Electrophysiological evidence that release from proactive inhibition reflects late semantic processing.
Huang Y; Zhao J; Asthana MK; Zuo K; Comfort WE; Xu Z
Psychophysiology; 2020 Oct; 57(10):e13639. PubMed ID: 32716552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The cost of proactive interference is constant across presentation conditions.
Endress AD; Siddique A
Acta Psychol (Amst); 2016 Oct; 170():186-94. PubMed ID: 27565246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Proactive effects in memory for stories.
Schultz EE; Johnson RE
Br J Psychol; 1982 Nov; 73(Pt 4):487-96. PubMed ID: 7171923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of episodic coding, proactive interference, and list length effects in a running span verbal working memory task.
Postle BR; Berger JS; Goldstein JH; Curtis CE; D'Esposito M
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2001 Mar; 1(1):10-21. PubMed ID: 12467100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Memory retrieval as a self-propagating process.
Bäuml KH; Schlichting A
Cognition; 2014 Jul; 132(1):16-21. PubMed ID: 24727424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The contribution of encoding and retrieval processes to proactive interference.
Kliegl O; Pastötter B; Bäuml KH
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2015 Nov; 41(6):1778-89. PubMed ID: 25603166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Inhibition does not always cause emotional devaluation: no evidence for retrieval-induced devaluation.
Janczyk M; Wühr P
Exp Psychol; 2012; 59(6):372-8. PubMed ID: 22851378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
