1 |
Compensating for Language Deficits in Amnesia I: H.M.'s Spared Retrieval Categories.
|
|
|
|
In: Brain sciences, vol 3, iss 1 (2013)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
2 |
Compensating for Language Deficits in Amnesia II: H.M.'s Spared versus Impaired Encoding Categories.
|
|
|
|
In: Brain sciences, vol 3, iss 2 (2013)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
3 |
Compensating for Language Deficits in Amnesia I: H.M.’s Spared Retrieval Categories
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
4 |
Compensating for Language Deficits in Amnesia II: H.M.’s Spared versus Impaired Encoding Categories
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
16 |
A Tale of Two Paradigms or Metatheoretical Approaches to Cognitive Neuropsychology: Did Schmolck, Stefanacci, and Squire (2000) Show That Hippocampal Lesions Only Impair Memory, whereas Adjacent (Extrahippocampal) Lesions Impair Detection and Explanation of Sentence Ambiguity?
|
|
|
|
In: Brain & language. - Orlando, Fla. [u.a.] : Elsevier 78 (2001) 2, 265-272
|
|
OLC Linguistik
|
|
Show details
|
|
17 |
A tale of two paradigms or metatheoretical approaches to cognitive neuropsychology : did Schmolck, Stefanacci, and Squire (2000) show that hippocampal lesions only impair memory, whereas adjacent (extrahippocampal) lesions impair detection and explanation of sentence ambiguity?
|
|
|
|
In: Brain & language. - Orlando, Fla. [u.a.] : Elsevier 78 (2001) 2, 265-272
|
|
BLLDB
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|