Similar(60)
Methodological problems with the multiple probe protocol as utilized in most recent publications are discussed.
Major results: There was a difference in task demand as measured by reaction time between the two protocols (the multiple probe protocol was more demanding), and a difference trend in P300 detection sensitivity between protocols for both information types combined in favor of the 1PB (p < .07).07
The Duolink II PLA probe protocol was used to detect the signals.
Chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) was performed according to the Zymed SPoT-Light Cyclin D1 Probe protocol suited for CISH [ 40] using the SPoT-Light Cyclin D1 Amplification Probe (Zymed Laboratories, Invitrogen Immunodetection, San Francisco, CA, USA).
Chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) was performed in accordance with the Zymed SPoT-Light Cyclin D1 Probe protocol, which is well suited to CISH [ 28], using the SPoT-Light Cyclin D1 Amplification Probe (Zymed laboratories, Invitrogen immunodetection; San Francisco, CA, USA).
To test the ability of the probe for both structural and blood flow in vivo imaging, a femoral blood vessel in the thigh of a hind leg of a Yorkshire pig (~50 Kg) was imaged by the handheld probe (protocol ACC307, approved by St. Michael's Hospital Animal Care and Use Committee, Toronto Canada).
As such, the mechanisms for benefits associated with modified dot-probe protocols warrant additional research.
Samples were tested for the presence of various arboviral RNA genomes by using the TaqMan quantitative reverse transcription PCR (qRT-PCR) technology and specific primers and probes (protocols available upon request to the corresponding author).
There was no effect of time passage across the repeated blocks of the one-probe protocol.
A modified dot-probe protocol has been shown to reduce SAD symptoms, in some but not all studies, presumably by modifying an attentional bias.
Participants were randomly assigned to a standard (i.e., control) or modified (i.e., active) dot-probe protocol condition and to participate in-lab or at home.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com