Time ranges where ERPs for faces and scrambled faces differed significantly in Experiment 1 (post stimulus latencies in msec).

Accuracy decreases with response latency after stimulus offset.

Pamela Reinagel (282995)

June 2013

a. Accuracy (% correct) as a function of reaction time for one subject in a block of trial...

Fixation and response latency to “short” and “long” levers on generalization trials.

Anna L. Toscano-Zapién (3146376)
Daniel Velázquez-López (3146379)
David N. Velázquez-Martínez (3146382)

July 2016

Upper panels present latency to attain a 100 msec fixation on trials where subjects later respond...

Mean ERP amplitudes taken in early (300–500 ms poststimulus) and late (500–700 ms poststimulus) time-windows at frontal (Fz, AFz, AF3, AF4, F1, F2, FCz) and parietal (see insert in Figure 6) sites in Experiment 2.

Holger Hill (635771)
Sabine Windmann (635772)

September 2014

Mean ERP amplitudes taken in early (300–500 ms poststimulus) and late (500–700 ms poststimulus) t...

Time ranges where ERPs showed a main effect of stimulus type in Experiment 2 (post stimulus latencies in msec).

Hirokata Fukushima (360909)
Satoshi Hirata (315463)
Ari Ueno (360910)
Goh Matsuda (360911)
Kohki Fuwa (360912)
Keiko Sugama (360913)
Kiyo Kusunoki (360914)
Masahiro Hirai (360915)
Kazuo Hiraki (262096)
Masaki Tomonaga (360916)
Toshikazu Hasegawa (36441)

February 2013

Time ranges where ERPs showed a main effect of stimulus type in Experiment 2 (post stimulus laten...

Post-conflict trial-to-trial adjustment.

Christoph Völter (332120)
Tilo Strobach (332121)
Désirée S. Aichert (332122)
Nicola Wöstmann (332123)
Anna Costa (332124)
Hans-Jürgen Möller (127187)
Torsten Schubert (332125)
Ulrich Ettinger (332126)

February 2013

Data represent reaction times (RT) in msec (±SEM). Congruent and incongruent current trials are s...

Chao Wang (146527)
Mingzhou Ding (48702)
Benzi M. Kluger (778584)

July 2015

(A) Topography of the ERP difference from the contrast of task-switch versus task-repeat trials. ...

ERPs during attentional allocation.

Sara M. Szczepanski (621804)
Nathan E. Crone (185289)
Rachel A. Kuperman (621805)
Kurtis I. Auguste (621806)
Josef Parvizi (214113)
Robert T. Knight (86917)

August 2014

(a) Single-trial and averaged ERPs time-locked to trial onset (left) or target onset (righ...

Time-course analysis of ERP and behavioral data.

Yoshiyuki Kashiwase (447862)
Kazumichi Matsumiya (447863)
Ichiro Kuriki (447864)
Satoshi Shioiri (447865)

August 2013

(A, B) Time course of amplitude for P300 (A) and N2pc (B) as a function of time after cue onset, ...

Behavioral priming data.

Christianne Jacobs (119757)
Tom A. de Graaf (119759)
Rainer Goebel (53057)
Alexander T. Sack (119761)

November 2012

A) Reaction times (RT) to congruent (solid line) and incongruent (dashed line) S2 stimuli per TMS...

Comparisons of the time-course data.

Yoshiyuki Kashiwase (447862)
Kazumichi Matsumiya (447863)
Ichiro Kuriki (447864)
Satoshi Shioiri (447865)

August 2013

Comparisons of the time courses of attentional modulation in the ERP data and SSVEP data (re-plot...

Late stimulus response at ERP P100.

Karema Al-Subari (3392189)
Saad Al-Baddai (729520)
Ana Maria Tomé (729521)
Gregor Volberg (289727)
Rainer Hammwöhner (729522)
Elmar W. Lang (729523)

April 2015

Top Left: Standardized original ERPs for both stimulus conditions. Top Right: ER...

Late stimulus response at ERP N200.

Karema Al-Subari (3392189)
Saad Al-Baddai (729520)
Ana Maria Tomé (729521)
Gregor Volberg (289727)
Rainer Hammwöhner (729522)
Elmar W. Lang (729523)

April 2015

Top Left: Standardized original ERPs for both stimulus conditions. Top Right: ER...

The ERP amplitude and latency (peak and response latency) in S1BF and S2. Panel.

Zhaoduan Li (520945)
Xingkui Liu (520946)
Yi Zhang (9093)
Jinshan Shi (520947)
Yu Zhang (12946)
Peng Xie (161786)
Tian Yu (117385)

February 2014

A) The left, upper graph shows the change of amplitude by whisker stimulation. The amplitude of S...

Response time is is correlated with foreperiod (fp) duration and VEP variability.

Anders Ledberg (139974)
Anna Montagnini (139977)
Richard Coppola (139980)
Steven L. Bressler (139982)

August 2012

(A) Mean response times for the two subjects as a function of fp duration (solid lines). E...

Grand-average ERPs for Experimental Session I (experiments I and II): evidence for saliency related response modulation.

Marta Teixeira (514064)
Gabriel Pires (514065)
Miguel Raimundo (514066)
Sérgio Nascimento (514067)
Vasco Almeida (514068)
Miguel Castelo-Branco (285814)

January 2014

Larger and faster responses are evoked by most salient stimuli. Grand-average ERPs', time locked ...

Accuracy decreases with response latency after stimulus offset.

Pamela Reinagel (282995)

June 2013

a. Accuracy (% correct) as a function of reaction time for one subject in a block of trial...

Fixation and response latency to “short” and “long” levers on generalization trials.

Anna L. Toscano-Zapién (3146376)
Daniel Velázquez-López (3146379)
David N. Velázquez-Martínez (3146382)

July 2016

Upper panels present latency to attain a 100 msec fixation on trials where subjects later respond...

Mean ERP amplitudes taken in early (300–500 ms poststimulus) and late (500–700 ms poststimulus) time-windows at frontal (Fz, AFz, AF3, AF4, F1, F2, FCz) and parietal (see insert in Figure 6) sites in Experiment 2.

Holger Hill (635771)
Sabine Windmann (635772)

September 2014

Mean ERP amplitudes taken in early (300–500 ms poststimulus) and late (500–700 ms poststimulus) t...

Time ranges where ERPs showed a main effect of stimulus type in Experiment 2 (post stimulus latencies in msec).

Hirokata Fukushima (360909)
Satoshi Hirata (315463)
Ari Ueno (360910)
Goh Matsuda (360911)
Kohki Fuwa (360912)
Keiko Sugama (360913)
Kiyo Kusunoki (360914)
Masahiro Hirai (360915)
Kazuo Hiraki (262096)
Masaki Tomonaga (360916)
Toshikazu Hasegawa (36441)

February 2013

Time ranges where ERPs showed a main effect of stimulus type in Experiment 2 (post stimulus laten...

Post-conflict trial-to-trial adjustment.

Christoph Völter (332120)
Tilo Strobach (332121)
Désirée S. Aichert (332122)
Nicola Wöstmann (332123)
Anna Costa (332124)
Hans-Jürgen Möller (127187)
Torsten Schubert (332125)
Ulrich Ettinger (332126)

February 2013

Data represent reaction times (RT) in msec (±SEM). Congruent and incongruent current trials are s...

Chao Wang (146527)
Mingzhou Ding (48702)
Benzi M. Kluger (778584)

July 2015

(A) Topography of the ERP difference from the contrast of task-switch versus task-repeat trials. ...

ERPs during attentional allocation.

Sara M. Szczepanski (621804)
Nathan E. Crone (185289)
Rachel A. Kuperman (621805)
Kurtis I. Auguste (621806)
Josef Parvizi (214113)
Robert T. Knight (86917)

August 2014

(a) Single-trial and averaged ERPs time-locked to trial onset (left) or target onset (righ...

Time-course analysis of ERP and behavioral data.

Yoshiyuki Kashiwase (447862)
Kazumichi Matsumiya (447863)
Ichiro Kuriki (447864)
Satoshi Shioiri (447865)

August 2013

(A, B) Time course of amplitude for P300 (A) and N2pc (B) as a function of time after cue onset, ...

Behavioral priming data.

Christianne Jacobs (119757)
Tom A. de Graaf (119759)
Rainer Goebel (53057)
Alexander T. Sack (119761)

November 2012

A) Reaction times (RT) to congruent (solid line) and incongruent (dashed line) S2 stimuli per TMS...

Comparisons of the time-course data.

Yoshiyuki Kashiwase (447862)
Kazumichi Matsumiya (447863)
Ichiro Kuriki (447864)
Satoshi Shioiri (447865)

August 2013

Comparisons of the time courses of attentional modulation in the ERP data and SSVEP data (re-plot...

Late stimulus response at ERP P100.

Karema Al-Subari (3392189)
Saad Al-Baddai (729520)
Ana Maria Tomé (729521)
Gregor Volberg (289727)
Rainer Hammwöhner (729522)
Elmar W. Lang (729523)

April 2015

Top Left: Standardized original ERPs for both stimulus conditions. Top Right: ER...

Late stimulus response at ERP N200.

Karema Al-Subari (3392189)
Saad Al-Baddai (729520)
Ana Maria Tomé (729521)
Gregor Volberg (289727)
Rainer Hammwöhner (729522)
Elmar W. Lang (729523)

April 2015

Top Left: Standardized original ERPs for both stimulus conditions. Top Right: ER...

The ERP amplitude and latency (peak and response latency) in S1BF and S2. Panel.

Zhaoduan Li (520945)
Xingkui Liu (520946)
Yi Zhang (9093)
Jinshan Shi (520947)
Yu Zhang (12946)
Peng Xie (161786)
Tian Yu (117385)

February 2014

A) The left, upper graph shows the change of amplitude by whisker stimulation. The amplitude of S...

Response time is is correlated with foreperiod (fp) duration and VEP variability.

Anders Ledberg (139974)
Anna Montagnini (139977)
Richard Coppola (139980)
Steven L. Bressler (139982)

August 2012

(A) Mean response times for the two subjects as a function of fp duration (solid lines). E...

Grand-average ERPs for Experimental Session I (experiments I and II): evidence for saliency related response modulation.

Marta Teixeira (514064)
Gabriel Pires (514065)
Miguel Raimundo (514066)
Sérgio Nascimento (514067)
Vasco Almeida (514068)
Miguel Castelo-Branco (285814)

January 2014

Larger and faster responses are evoked by most salient stimuli. Grand-average ERPs', time locked ...

Accuracy decreases with response latency after stimulus offset.

Pamela Reinagel (282995)

June 2013

a. Accuracy (% correct) as a function of reaction time for one subject in a block of trial...

Fixation and response latency to “short” and “long” levers on generalization trials.

Anna L. Toscano-Zapién (3146376)
Daniel Velázquez-López (3146379)
David N. Velázquez-Martínez (3146382)

July 2016

Upper panels present latency to attain a 100 msec fixation on trials where subjects later respond...

Mean ERP amplitudes taken in early (300–500 ms poststimulus) and late (500–700 ms poststimulus) time-windows at frontal (Fz, AFz, AF3, AF4, F1, F2, FCz) and parietal (see insert in Figure 6) sites in Experiment 2.

Holger Hill (635771)
Sabine Windmann (635772)

September 2014

Mean ERP amplitudes taken in early (300–500 ms poststimulus) and late (500–700 ms poststimulus) t...

Time ranges where ERPs for faces and scrambled faces differed significantly in Experiment 1 (post stimulus latencies in msec).

Abstract

Extracted data

Time ranges where ERPs for faces and scrambled faces differed significantly in Experiment 1 (post stimulus latencies in msec).

Abstract

Extracted data

Related items

Related items