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 *

166 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9705058)

  • 21. Dissociation between vergence and binocular disparity cues in the control of prehension.
    Melmoth DR; Storoni M; Todd G; Finlay AL; Grant S
    Exp Brain Res; 2007 Nov; 183(3):283-98. PubMed ID: 17665181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Gaze-grasp coordination in obstacle avoidance: differences between binocular and monocular viewing.
    Grant S
    Exp Brain Res; 2015 Dec; 233(12):3489-505. PubMed ID: 26298046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. How preparation to touch or grasp alters visual size perception.
    Vishton PM; Jones ED; Stevens JA
    Cogn Process; 2015 Sep; 16 Suppl 1():431-5. PubMed ID: 26245648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Attenuation of size illusion effect in dual-task conditions.
    Katsumata H
    Hum Mov Sci; 2019 Oct; 67():102497. PubMed ID: 31326743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The functional subdivision of the visual brain: Is there a real illusion effect on action? A multi-lab replication study.
    Kopiske KK; Bruno N; Hesse C; Schenk T; Franz VH
    Cortex; 2016 Jun; 79():130-52. PubMed ID: 27156056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Does the size-illusion effect on prehensile movements depend on preview duration for visuomotor process?
    Katsumata H
    J Mot Behav; 2014; 46(2):83-93. PubMed ID: 24446928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Dissociations in rod bisection: the effect of viewing conditions on perception and action.
    Hughes LE; Bates TC; Aimola Davies AM
    Cortex; 2008 Oct; 44(9):1279-87. PubMed ID: 18761142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Grasping deficits and adaptations in adults with stereo vision losses.
    Melmoth DR; Finlay AL; Morgan MJ; Grant S
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2009 Aug; 50(8):3711-20. PubMed ID: 19339741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Perceptual illusion and the real-time control of action.
    Westwood DA; Goodale MA
    Spat Vis; 2003; 16(3-4):243-54. PubMed ID: 12858950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Practice makes perfect, but only with the right hand: sensitivity to perceptual illusions with awkward grasps decreases with practice in the right but not the left hand.
    Gonzalez CL; Ganel T; Whitwell RL; Morrissey B; Goodale MA
    Neuropsychologia; 2008 Jan; 46(2):624-31. PubMed ID: 17950763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Binocular vision and prehension in middle childhood.
    Watt SJ; Bradshaw MF; Clarke TJ; Elliot KM
    Neuropsychologia; 2003; 41(4):415-20. PubMed ID: 12559159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Motion parallax enables depth processing for action in a visual form agnosic when binocular vision is unavailable.
    Dijkerman HC; Milner AD; Carey DP
    Neuropsychologia; 1999 Dec; 37(13):1505-10. PubMed ID: 10617271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Discriminating the role of binocular information in the timing of a one-handed catch. The effects of telestereoscopic viewing and ball size.
    Bennett SJ; van der Kamp J; Savelsbergh GJ; Davids K
    Exp Brain Res; 2000 Dec; 135(3):341-7. PubMed ID: 11146812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The effect of the Ebbinghaus illusion on grasping behaviour of children.
    Hanisch C; Konczak J; Dohle C
    Exp Brain Res; 2001 Mar; 137(2):237-45. PubMed ID: 11315553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Illusions in action: consequences of inconsistent processing of spatial attributes.
    Smeets JB; Brenner E; de Grave DD; Cuijpers RH
    Exp Brain Res; 2002 Nov; 147(2):135-44. PubMed ID: 12410328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Dual processes underlie the effect of the Ebbinghaüs illusion on control of grasping.
    Chen Z; Zhang N; Saunders JA
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2021 Nov; 47(11):1472-1492. PubMed ID: 34843356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. A comparison of visuomotor cue integration strategies for object placement and prehension.
    Greenwald HS; Knill DC
    Vis Neurosci; 2009; 26(1):63-72. PubMed ID: 18759994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Binocular cues are important in controlling the grasp but not the reach in natural prehension movements.
    Watt SJ; Bradshaw MF
    Neuropsychologia; 2000; 38(11):1473-81. PubMed ID: 10906373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Grasping the Müller-Lyer illusion: not a change in perceived length.
    Biegstraaten M; de Grave DD; Brenner E; Smeets JB
    Exp Brain Res; 2007 Jan; 176(3):497-503. PubMed ID: 17146650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Monocular and binocular control of human interceptive movements.
    Servos P; Goodale MA
    Exp Brain Res; 1998 Mar; 119(1):92-102. PubMed ID: 9521540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.