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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11125655)

  • 1. The consolidation of plaintiffs: the effects of number of plaintiffs on jurors' liability decisions, damage awards, and cognitive processing of evidence.
    Horowitz IA; Bordens KS
    J Appl Psychol; 2000 Dec; 85(6):909-18. PubMed ID: 11125655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. The effects of defendant conduct on jury damage awards.
    Greene E; Johns M; Smith A
    J Appl Psychol; 2001 Apr; 86(2):228-37. PubMed ID: 11393436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Jurors' use of standards of proof in decisions about punitive damages.
    Woody WD; Greene E
    Behav Sci Law; 2012; 30(6):856-72. PubMed ID: 22829456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Conduct and its consequences: attempts at debiasing jury judgments.
    Smith AC; Greene E
    Law Hum Behav; 2005 Oct; 29(5):505-26. PubMed ID: 16254740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The power of meaningful numbers: Attorney guidance and jury deliberation improve the reliability and gist validity of damage awards.
    Reed K; Hans VP; Rotenstein V; Helm RK; Rodriguez A; McKendall P; Reyna VF
    Law Hum Behav; 2024 Apr; 48(2):83-103. PubMed ID: 38602803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The impact of jury instructions on the fusion of liability and compensatory damages.
    Wissler RL; Rector KA; Saks MJ
    Law Hum Behav; 2001 Apr; 25(2):125-39. PubMed ID: 11419378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Compensating plaintiffs and punishing defendants: is bifurcation necessary?
    Greene E; Woody WD; Winter R
    Law Hum Behav; 2000 Apr; 24(2):187-205. PubMed ID: 10810838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effects of harassment severity and organizational behavior on damage awards in a hostile work environment sexual harassment case.
    Cass SA; Levett LM; Kovera MB
    Behav Sci Law; 2010; 28(3):303-21. PubMed ID: 19579260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Punitive damage decision making: the decisions of citizens and trial court judges.
    Robbennolt JK
    Law Hum Behav; 2002 Jun; 26(3):315-41. PubMed ID: 12061621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. What's half a lung worth? Civil jurors' accounts of their award decision making.
    Mott NL; Hans VP; Simpson L
    Law Hum Behav; 2000 Aug; 24(4):401-19. PubMed ID: 10974800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Juror competence in civil trials: effects of preinstruction and evidence technicality.
    ForsterLee L; Horowitz IA; Bourgeois MJ
    J Appl Psychol; 1993 Feb; 78(1):14-21. PubMed ID: 8449852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. How reason for surgery and patient weight affect verdicts and perceptions in medical malpractice trials: a comparison of students and jurors.
    Reichert J; Miller MK; Bornstein BH; Shelton HD
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):395-418. PubMed ID: 21308752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. How type of excuse defense, mock juror age, and defendant age affect mock jurors' decisions.
    Higgins PL; Heath WP; Grannemann BD
    J Soc Psychol; 2007 Aug; 147(4):371-92. PubMed ID: 17955749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Separating compensatory and punitive damage award decisions by trial bifurcation.
    Shea Adams CM; Bourgeois MJ
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Feb; 30(1):11-30. PubMed ID: 16729206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Keep your bias to yourself: How deliberating with differently biased others affects mock-jurors' guilt decisions, perceptions of the defendant, memories, and evidence interpretation.
    Ruva CL; Guenther CC
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Oct; 41(5):478-493. PubMed ID: 28714733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Stacking the Jury: Legal Professionals' Peremptory Challenges Reflect Jurors' Levels of Implicit Race Bias.
    Morrison M; DeVaul-Fetters A; Gawronski B
    Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2016 Aug; 42(8):1129-41. PubMed ID: 27354112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effects of jury size, evidence complexity, and note taking on jury process and performance in a civil trial.
    Horowitz IA; Bordens KS
    J Appl Psychol; 2002 Feb; 87(1):121-30. PubMed ID: 11916206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. From science to evidence: the testimony on causation in the Bendectin cases.
    Sanders J
    Stanford Law Rev; 1993 Nov; 46(1):1-86. PubMed ID: 10131325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.