English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Effects of sample stimulus, delay, and correct response position from Trial N − 1 on performance during Trial N were examined for a two-choice delayed matching from sample task. The results seemed to demonstrate proactive interference with retention of sample stimuli on Trial N when that stimulus was different from Trial N − 1 as compared to when the stimulus was the same as on Trial N − 1. In addition, when stimuli were the same on Trial N − 1 and Trial N, and Trial N − 1 was incorrect, there was greater interference than if Trial N − 1 was correct. Evaluation of performance as a function of delays on Trial N − 1 and Trial N provided some support for D’Amato’s recent description of delayed matching from sample performance as a temporal discrimination process.

Proactive effects of stimuli, delays, and response position during delayed matching from sample