VIOLATION OF ASSUMED NORMALITY IN TRADITIONAL MULTIDIMENSIONAL SCALING.SUBKOVIAK MJ; DAVID FARR S.1976; EDUC. PSYCHOL. MEASUR.; U.S.A.; DA. 1976; VOL. 36; NO 3; PP. 639-645; BIBL. 9 REF.Article

THE INFLUENCE OF THE SIMILARITY OF RETRIEVED RESPONSE TENDENCIES ON THE ABILITY TO SIMULTANEOUSLY INITIATE AND/OR SUPPRESS OUTPUTSBUCKOLZ E.1982; ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA; ISSN 0001-6918; NLD; DA. 1982; VOL. 52; NO 1-2; PP. 1-21; BIBL. 18 REF.Article

TWIN-FLASH RESPONSE AS A FUNCTION OF FLASH DIAMETERMEIJER JG; VAN DER WILDT GJ; VAN DEN BRINK G et al.1978; VISION RES.; GBR; DA. 1978; VOL. 18; NO 9; PP. 1111-1116; BIBL. 13 REF.Article

EFFECT OF PRESENTATION TIME AND GESTALT PRINCIPLES OF PROXIMITY, SIMILARITY, AND CLOSURE ON PERCEPTUAL ACCURACYO'SHAUGHNESSY MP; KAYSON WA.1982; PERCEPT. MAT. SKILLS; ISSN 0031-5125; USA; DA. 1982; VOL. 55; NO 2; PP. 359-362; BIBL. 6 REF.Article

THE SCALING OF PAIRED COMPARISON DATA WITH ONE OR MORE EXTREME STIMULI: A COMPARISON OF THREE MODELS.WILD BS; CABRAL RM.1976; EDUC. PSYCHOL. MEASUR.; U.S.A.; DA. 1976; VOL. 36; NO 3; PP. 657-670; BIBL. 16 REF.Article

DIE BEDEUTUNGSAEHNLICHKEIT VON ANTONYMEN ADJEKTIVEN = LA SIMILITUDE SIGNIFICATIVE DES ADJECTIFS ANTINOMIQUESMARX W.1983; Z. EXP. ANGEW. PSYCHOL.; ISSN 0044-2712; DEU; DA. 1983; VOL. 30; NO 1; PP. 126-132; ABS. ENG/FRE; BIBL. 7 REF.Article

SIMILARITY AND PREFERENCE JUDGMENTS OF MUSICAL STIMULICUPCHIK GC; RICKERT M; MENDELSON J et al.1982; SCAND. J. PSYCHOL.; ISSN 0036-5564; SWE; DA. 1982; VOL. 23; NO 4; PP. 273-282; BIBL. 2 P.Article

APPLICATIONS OF COMBINATORIAL PROGRAMMING TO DATA ANALYSIS: SERIATION USING ASYMMETRIC PROXIMITY MEASURES.BAKER FB; HUBERT LJ.1977; BRIT. J. MATH. STATIST. PSYCHOL.; G.B.; DA. 1977; VOL. 30; NO 2; PP. 154-164; BIBL. 29 REF.Article

SIMILARITY, SEPARABILITY, AND THE TRIANGLE INEQUALITYTVERSKY A; GATI I.1982; PSYCHOL. REV.; ISSN 0033-295X; USA; DA. 1982; VOL. 89; NO 2; PP. 123-154; BIBL. 2 P.Article

ARE NOMINAL SAME-DIFFERENT MATCHES SLOWER DUE TO DIFFERENCES IN LEVEL OF PROCESSING OR TO RESPONSE COMPETITION.ERIKSEN CW; O'HARA WP.1982; PERCEPT. PSYCHOPHYS.; ISSN 0031-5117; USA; DA. 1982; VOL. 32; NO 4; PP. 335-344; BIBL. 21 REF.Article

EIN MODIFIZIERTES HALO-MODELL DER EIN- UND ZWEIDIMENSSIONALEN AEHNLICHKEITSSKALIERUNG = MODELE DE HALO MODIFIE QUI PERMET DE CONCEVOIR DES ECHELLES DE SIMILITUDE A UNE ET DEUX DIMENSIONSFORMANN A.1981; Z. EXP. ANGEW. PSYCHOL.; ISSN 0044-2712; DEU; DA. 1981; VOL. 28; NO 1; PP. 100-129; ABS. ENG/FRE; BIBL. 16 REF.Article

ACCESSING MENTAL REPRESENTATIONS OF MENTALLY RETARDED CHILDRENCIRRIN FM; HURTIG RR.1981; AM. J. MENT. DEFIC.; ISSN 0002-9351; USA; DA. 1981; VOL. 86; NO 2; PP. 188-193Article

FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE AND CONCRETENESS RATINGS OF HOMOGRAPH MEANINGSWOLLEN KA; COX SD; COAHRAN MM et al.1980; BEHAV. RES. METHODS INSTRUMENT; USA; DA. 1980; VOL. 12; NO 1; PP. 8-15; BIBL. 18 REF.Article

MULTIDIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS OF MALE AND FEMALE VOICESMURRY T; SADANAND SINGH.1980; J. ACOUST. SOC. AM.; ISSN 0001-4966; USA; DA. 1980; VOL. 68; NO 5; PP. 1294-1300; BIBL. 14 REF.Article

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND THE SIMILARITY/ATTRACTION RELATIONSHIP: EFFECTS OF LEVEL OF SIMILARITY-DISSIMILARITYSNYDER RA.1979; PERCEPT. MOTOR SKILLS; USA; DA. 1979; VOL. 49; NO 3; PP. 1003-1008; BIBL. 13 REF.Article

PATTERN SIMILARITY AND COGNITIVE TRANSFORMATIONS.IMAI S.1977; ACTA PSYCHOL.; PAYS-BAS; DA. 1977; VOL. 41; NO 6; PP. 433-447; BIBL. 18 REF.Article

STATE AND PROCESS LIMITATIONS IN INFORMATION PROCESSING: AN ADDITIVE FACTORS ANALYSIS.SHWARTZ SP; POMERANTZ JR; EGETH HE et al.1977; J. EXPER. PSYCHOL., HUMAN. PERCEPT. PERFORM.; U.S.A.; DA. 1977; VOL. 3; NO 3; PP. 402-410; BIBL. 10 REF.Article

HOLISTIC AND ANALYTIC PROCESSES IN THE COMPARISON OF LETTERS.TAYLOR DA.1976; PERCEPT. AND PSYCHOL.; U.S.A.; DA. 1976; VOL. 20; NO 3; PP. 187-190; BIBL. 9 REF.Article

MULTIDIMENSIONAL SCALING OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES FOR AN INDIVIDUAL PERSON WITH A HAND-HELD CALCULATORDAVIS RG.1981; BEHAV. RES. METHODS INSTRUM.; ISSN 0005-7878; USA; DA. 1981; VOL. 13; NO 1; PP. 25-30; BIBL. 9 REF.Article

ERRORS IN SPEECH AND SHORT-TERM MEMORY: THE EFFECTS OF PHONEMIC SIMILARITY AND SYLLABLE POSITIONELLIS AW.1980; J. VERB. LEARN. VERB. BEHAV.; ISSN 0022-5371; USA; DA. 1980; VOL. 19; NO 5; PP. 624-634; BIBL. 25 REF.Article

IDENTITY, COMPENSATION, AND CONSERVATIONACREDOLO C; ACREDOLO LP.1979; CHILD DEVELOP.; USA; DA. 1979; VOL. 50; NO 2; PP. 524-535; BIBL. 30 REF.Article

VARIABLE CRITERION ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND STIMULUS SIMILARITY IN CHOICE REACTION TIMEGRICE GR; SPIKER VA; NULLMEYER R et al.1979; PERCEPT. AND PSYCHOPHYS.; USA; DA. 1979; VOL. 25; NO 5; PP. 353-370; BIBL. 13 REF.Article

STIMULUS SIMILARITY AND POSITIVE INDUCTIONMACDONALL JS; MARCUCELLA H.1978; BULL. PSYCHON. SOC.; USA; DA. 1978; VOL. 12; NO 1; PP. 43-46; BIBL. 11 REF.Article

CHOICE BETWEEN FINGER MOVEMENTS OF DIFFERENT AND IDENTICAL FORM: THE EFFECT OF RELATIVE SIGNAL FREQUENCYHEUER H.1982; PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH; ISSN 0340-0727; DEU; DA. 1982; VOL. 44; NO 4; PP. 323-342; BIBL. 19 REF.Article

THE FUNCTIONS OF THE RIGHT HEMISPHERE AND THE BRAIN REGIONS INVOLVED IN FIGURAL MATCHINGDIMOND JJ; SCAMMELL RE; WEEKS RD et al.1979; ACTA NEUROL. BELG.; BEL; DA. 1979; VOL. 79; NO 5; PP. 388-397; BIBL. 5 REF.Article