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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

108 related items for PubMed ID: 2266865

  • 1. Common processes underlie enhanced recency effects for auditory and changing-state stimuli.
    Glenberg AM.
    Mem Cognit; 1990 Nov; 18(6):638-50. PubMed ID: 2266865
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Enhanced recency effects with changing-state and primary-linguistic stimuli.
    Kallman HJ, Cameron P.
    Mem Cognit; 1989 May; 17(3):318-28. PubMed ID: 2725269
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Serial recall of two-voice lists: implications for theories of auditory recency and suffix effects.
    Greene RL.
    Mem Cognit; 1991 Jan; 19(1):72-8. PubMed ID: 2017031
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Recency and suffix effects in serial recall of musical stimuli.
    Greene RL, Samuel AG.
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1986 Oct; 12(4):517-24. PubMed ID: 2945898
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Visual distinctiveness can enhance recency effects.
    Bornstein BH, Neely CB, LeCompte DC.
    Mem Cognit; 1995 May; 23(3):273-8. PubMed ID: 7791596
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Enumeration produces poor primacy for tactile presentation relative to visual and auditory presentation as the only modality effect.
    Gibbons JA, Velkey AJ, Partin KT.
    Percept Mot Skills; 2008 Jun; 106(3):795-810. PubMed ID: 18712201
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Further evidence of interference between lipreading and auditory recency.
    Gardiner JM, Gathercole SE, Gregg VH.
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1983 Apr; 9(2):328-33. PubMed ID: 6222148
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Is there a modality effect? Evidence for visual recency and suffix effects.
    Battacchi MW, Pelamatti GM, Umiltà C.
    Mem Cognit; 1990 Nov; 18(6):651-8. PubMed ID: 2266866
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Ineffectiveness of visual distinctiveness in enhancing immediate recall.
    McDowd J, Madigan S.
    Mem Cognit; 1991 Jul; 19(4):371-7. PubMed ID: 1895947
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. The role of item-specific information for the serial position curve in free recall.
    Seiler KH, Engelkamp J.
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2003 Sep; 29(5):954-64. PubMed ID: 14516227
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Explanations of grouping in immediate ordered recall.
    Frick RW.
    Mem Cognit; 1989 Sep; 17(5):551-62. PubMed ID: 2796740
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Auditory attentional capture during serial recall: violations at encoding of an algorithm-based neural model?
    Hughes RW, Vachon F, Jones DM.
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2005 Jul; 31(4):736-49. PubMed ID: 16060777
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Evidence for auditory temporal distinctiveness: modality effects in order and frequency judgments.
    Glenberg AM, Fernandez A.
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 1988 Oct; 14(4):728-39. PubMed ID: 2972805
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Inverting the modality effect in serial recall.
    Beaman CP.
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 2002 Apr; 55(2):371-89. PubMed ID: 12047050
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 6.