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: 9656279)

  • 1. Stimulus-response compatibility and position of the hands: nonadditive effects.
    Ghozlan A
    Percept Mot Skills; 1998 Jun; 86(3 Pt 1):843-50. PubMed ID: 9656279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Simon's experiments and stimulus-response compatibility: hypothesis of two automatic responses.
    Ghozlan A
    Percept Mot Skills; 1997 Feb; 84(1):35-45. PubMed ID: 9132731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Spatial compatibility and position of the effectors].
    Nicoletti R; Umiltà C; Làdavas E
    Boll Soc Ital Biol Sper; 1983 Nov; 59(11):1687-92. PubMed ID: 6667310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Spatial stimulus-response compatibility: presentation of stimuli within one visual hemifield].
    Nicoletti R; Anzola GP; Rizzolatti G; Umiltà C
    Boll Soc Ital Biol Sper; 1980 Jul; 56(13):1426-31. PubMed ID: 7448039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Proprioception and stimulus-response compatibility.
    Worringham CJ; Kerr GK
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2000 Feb; 53(1):69-83. PubMed ID: 10718064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Is automatic imitation a specialized form of stimulus-response compatibility? Dissociating imitative and spatial compatibilities.
    Boyer TW; Longo MR; Bertenthal BI
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2012 Mar; 139(3):440-8. PubMed ID: 22326448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of predictions and data for a model of two automatic responses in stimulus-response compatibility.
    Ghozlan A
    Percept Mot Skills; 2000 Dec; 91(3 Pt 2):1120-6. PubMed ID: 11219654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Stimulus-response compatibility for absolute and relative spatial correspondence in reaching and in button pressing.
    Stins JF; Michaels CF
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2000 May; 53(2):569-89. PubMed ID: 10881619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Dissociation of S-R compatibility and Simon effects with mixed tasks and mappings.
    Proctor RW; Yamaguchi M; Dutt V; Gonzalez C
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2013 Apr; 39(2):593-609. PubMed ID: 22963231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Mixing compatible and incompatible mappings: elimination, reduction, and enhancement of spatial compatibility effects.
    Vu KP; Proctor RW
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2004 Apr; 57(3):539-56. PubMed ID: 15204140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Role of hand dominance in mapping preferences for emotional-valence words to keypress responses.
    Song X; Chen J; Proctor RW
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2017 Oct; 180():33-39. PubMed ID: 28823632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Stimulus-response compatibilities between vertically oriented stimuli and horizontally oriented responses: the effects of hand position and posture.
    Michaels CF; Schilder S
    Percept Psychophys; 1991 Apr; 49(4):342-8. PubMed ID: 2030931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Difference in stimulus-response compatibility effect in premotor and motor time between upper and lower limbs.
    Kato Y; Asami T
    Percept Mot Skills; 1998 Dec; 87(3 Pt 1):939-46. PubMed ID: 9885062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dual-task crosstalk between saccades and manual responses.
    Huestegge L; Koch I
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Apr; 35(2):352-62. PubMed ID: 19331493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Three-dimensional spatial stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility for visual signals with hand and foot controls.
    Chan AH; Chan KW
    Appl Ergon; 2010 Oct; 41(6):840-8. PubMed ID: 20381009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Stimulus-response compatibility for mixed mappings and tasks with unique responses.
    Proctor RW; Vu KP
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 Feb; 63(2):320-40. PubMed ID: 19526436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Visual field x response hand interactions and level priming in the processing of laterally presented hierarchical stimuli.
    Wendt M; Vietze I; Kluwe RH
    Brain Cogn; 2007 Feb; 63(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 16901597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Influences of hand posture and hand position on compatibility effects for up-down stimuli mapped to left-right responses: evidence for a hand referent hypothesis.
    Cho YS; Proctor RW
    Percept Psychophys; 2002 Nov; 64(8):1301-15. PubMed ID: 12519027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The potentiation of two components of the reach-to-grasp action during object categorisation in visual memory.
    Derbyshire N; Ellis R; Tucker M
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2006 May; 122(1):74-98. PubMed ID: 16376844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Spatial stimulus response compatibility for a horizontal visual display with hand and foot controls.
    Chan KW; Chan AH
    Ergonomics; 2011 Mar; 54(3):233-45. PubMed ID: 21390953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.