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 *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9610119)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 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. 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]  

  • 5. Altering memory through recall: the effects of cue-guided retrieval processing.
    McDaniel MA; Kowitz MD; Dunay PK
    Mem Cognit; 1989 Jul; 17(4):423-34. PubMed ID: 2761400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Exploring the role of attention during memory retrieval: effects of semantic encoding and divided attention.
    Lozito JP; Mulligan NW
    Mem Cognit; 2006 Jul; 34(5):986-98. PubMed ID: 17128598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Effects of phonological similarity and concurrent irrelevant articulation on short-term-memory recall of repeated and novel word lists.
    Coltheart V
    Mem Cognit; 1993 Jul; 21(4):539-45. PubMed ID: 8350745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Semantic similarity and immediate serial recall: is there an effect on all trials?
    Saint-Aubin J; Ouellette D; Poirier M
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2005 Feb; 12(1):171-7. PubMed ID: 15945210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The phonological similarity effect in immediate recall: positions of shared phonemes.
    Li X; Schweickert R; Gandour J
    Mem Cognit; 2000 Oct; 28(7):1116-25. PubMed ID: 11126935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Calling all codes: interactive effects of semantics, phonology, and orthography produce dissociations in a repetition blindness paradigm.
    Stolz JA; Neely JH
    Am J Psychol; 2008; 121(1):105-28. PubMed ID: 18437804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Serial and free recall in children can be improved by training: evidence for the importance of phonological and semantic representations in immediate memory tasks.
    Melby-Lervåg M; Hulme C
    Psychol Sci; 2010 Nov; 21(11):1694-700. PubMed ID: 20921571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Resolving semantic and proactive interference in memory over the short-term.
    Atkins AS; Berman MG; Reuter-Lorenz PA; Lewis RL; Jonides J
    Mem Cognit; 2011 Jul; 39(5):806-17. PubMed ID: 21327614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Proactive interference in a semantic short-term memory deficit: role of semantic and phonological relatedness.
    Hamilton AC; Martin RC
    Cortex; 2007 Jan; 43(1):112-23. PubMed ID: 17334211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The categorical structure of semantic memory for famous people: a new approach using release from proactive interference.
    Darling S; Valentine T
    Cognition; 2005 May; 96(1):35-65. PubMed ID: 15833306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The importance of semantic similarity to the irrelevant speech effect.
    Neely CB; LeCompte DC
    Mem Cognit; 1999 Jan; 27(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 10087854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Interference between storage and processing in working memory: Feature overwriting, not similarity-based competition.
    Oberauer K
    Mem Cognit; 2009 Apr; 37(3):346-57. PubMed ID: 19246349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Exploring the necessary conditions for phonological interference in serial recall.
    James T; Roodenrys S
    Memory; 2023 Aug; 31(7):891-904. PubMed ID: 37165512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Levels of processing with free and cued recall and unilateral temporal lobe epilepsy.
    Lespinet-Najib V; N'Kaoua B; Sauzéon H; Bresson C; Rougier A; Claverie B
    Brain Lang; 2004 Apr; 89(1):83-90. PubMed ID: 15010240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The influence of semantic and morphological complexity of verbs on sentence recall: Implications for the nature of conceptual representation and category-specific deficits.
    Mobayyen F; de Almeida RG
    Brain Cogn; 2005 Mar; 57(2):168-71. PubMed ID: 15708211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.