These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

187 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10810841)

  • 21. Juror and expert conceptions of battered women.
    Dodge M; Greene E
    Violence Vict; 1991; 6(4):271-82. PubMed ID: 1822697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Effects of false-evidence ploys and expert testimony on jurors' verdicts, recommended sentences, and perceptions of confession evidence.
    Woody WD; Forrest KD
    Behav Sci Law; 2009; 27(3):333-60. PubMed ID: 19405020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. From the shadows into the light: How pretrial publicity and deliberation affect mock jurors' decisions, impressions, and memory.
    Ruva CL; Guenther CC
    Law Hum Behav; 2015 Jun; 39(3):294-310. PubMed ID: 25495716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The effect of expert witness testimony and complainant cognitive statements on mock jurors' perceptions of rape trial testimony.
    Ryan N; Westera N
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2018; 25(5):693-705. PubMed ID: 31984046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Cognitive and human factors in legal layperson decision making: Sources of bias in juror decision making.
    Curley LJ; Munro J; Dror IE
    Med Sci Law; 2022 Jul; 62(3):206-215. PubMed ID: 35175157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Does expert psychological testimony inform or influence juror decision making? A social cognitive analysis.
    Kovera MB; Gresham AW; Borgida E; Gray E; Regan PC
    J Appl Psychol; 1997 Feb; 82(1):178-91. PubMed ID: 9119796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Impact of Evidence Type and Judicial Warning on Juror Perceptions of Global and Specific Witness Evidence.
    Wheatcroft JM; Keogan H
    J Psychol; 2017 Apr; 151(3):247-267. PubMed ID: 27982750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The Interactive Effects of Race and Expert Testimony on Jurors' Perceptions of Recanted Confessions.
    Ewanation L; Maeder EM
    Front Psychol; 2021; 12():699077. PubMed ID: 34539496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The role of the radiation safety specialist as witness: risk communication with attorneys, judges, and jurors.
    Johnson RH
    Health Phys; 2001 Dec; 81(6):661-9. PubMed ID: 11725884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Can expert testimony sensitize jurors to variations in confession evidence?
    Henderson KS; Levett LM
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Dec; 40(6):638-649. PubMed ID: 27243361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Understanding pretrial publicity: predecisional distortion of evidence by mock jurors.
    Hope L; Memon A; McGeorge P
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2004 Jun; 10(2):111-9. PubMed ID: 15222805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Neuroimage evidence and the insanity defense.
    Schweitzer NJ; Saks MJ
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(4):592-607. PubMed ID: 21744379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Face-to-face confrontation: effects of closed-circuit technology on children's eyewitness testimony and jurors' decisions.
    Goodman GS; Tobey AE; Batterman-Faunce JM; Orcutt H; Thomas S; Shapiro C; Sachsenmaier T
    Law Hum Behav; 1998 Apr; 22(2):165-203. PubMed ID: 9566121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Thin slice expert testimony and mock trial deliberations.
    Parrott CT; Brodsky SL; Wilson JK
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2015; 42-43():67-74. PubMed ID: 26346686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Psychological aspects of courtroom testimony.
    Loftus EF
    Ann N Y Acad Sci; 1980; 347():27-37. PubMed ID: 6930909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Educating jurors about eyewitness testimony in criminal cases with circumstantial and forensic evidence.
    Safer MA; Murphy RP; Wise RA; Bussey L; Millett C; Holfeld B
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2016; 47():86-92. PubMed ID: 27037161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Expert evidence, the adversary system, and the jury.
    Vidmar N
    Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S137-43. PubMed ID: 16030330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Effects of trial complexity on decision making.
    Horowitz IA; ForsterLee L; Brolly I
    J Appl Psychol; 1996 Dec; 81(6):757-68. PubMed ID: 9019123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. How Cross-Examination on Subjectivity and Bias Affects Jurors' Evaluations of Forensic Science Evidence.
    Thompson WC; Scurich N
    J Forensic Sci; 2019 Sep; 64(5):1379-1388. PubMed ID: 30791101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Forensic physicians and written evidence: witness statements v. expert reports.
    Choong KA; Barrett M
    J Forensic Leg Med; 2014 Feb; 22():93-8. PubMed ID: 24485431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.