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 *

131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11868620)

  • 1. The effects of general pretrial publicity on juror decisions: an examination of moderators and mediating mechanisms.
    Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2002 Feb; 26(1):43-72. PubMed ID: 11868620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Examining pretrial publicity in a shadow jury paradigm: issues of slant, quantity, persistence and generalizability.
    Daftary-Kapur T; Penrod SD; O'Connor M; Wallace B
    Law Hum Behav; 2014 Oct; 38(5):462-77. PubMed ID: 24933173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effects of pretrial publicity on male and female jurors and judges in a mock rape trial.
    Riedel RG
    Psychol Rep; 1993 Dec; 73(3 Pt 1):819-32. PubMed ID: 8302986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Acquaintance rape: the effect of race of defendant and race of victim on white juror decisions.
    Hymes RW; Leinart M; Rowe S; Rogers W
    J Soc Psychol; 1993 Oct; 133(5):627-34. PubMed ID: 8283859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. General pretrial publicity in sexual assault trials.
    Woody WD; Viney W
    Psychol Rep; 2007 Oct; 101(2):527-30. PubMed ID: 18175495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Juror decision-making in cases of rape involving high functioning Autistic persons.
    Devine K; Mojtahedi D
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2021; 77():101714. PubMed ID: 34062383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Negative and positive pretrial publicity affect juror memory and decision making.
    Ruva CL; McEvoy C
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2008 Sep; 14(3):226-35. PubMed ID: 18808276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Beyond pretrial publicity: legal and ethical issues associated with change of venue surveys.
    Posey AJ; Dahl LM
    Law Hum Behav; 2002 Feb; 26(1):107-25. PubMed ID: 11868616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Mock juror sensitivity to forensic evidence in drug facilitated sexual assaults.
    Schuller RA; Ryan A; Krauss D; Jenkins G
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2013; 36(2):121-8. PubMed ID: 23433947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Defendant remorse, need for affect, and juror sentencing decisions.
    Corwin EP; Cramer RJ; Griffin DA; Brodsky SL
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2012; 40(1):41-9. PubMed ID: 22396340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Measurement of empathy toward rape victims and rapists.
    Deitz SR; Blackwell KT; Daley PC; Bentley BJ
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 1982 Aug; 43(2):372-84. PubMed ID: 7120042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The impact of pretrial publicity on mock juror and jury verdicts: A meta-analysis.
    Hoetger LA; Devine DJ; Brank EM; Drew RM; Rees R
    Law Hum Behav; 2022 Apr; 46(2):121-139. PubMed ID: 35084906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Juror Decision Making in Acquaintance and Marital Rape: The Influence of Clothing, Alcohol, and Preexisting Stereotypical Attitudes.
    Osborn K; Davis JP; Button S; Foster J
    J Interpers Violence; 2021 Mar; 36(5-6):NP2675-NP2696. PubMed ID: 29629635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Juror characteristics on trial: Investigating how psychopathic traits, rape attitudes, victimization experiences, and juror demographics influence decision-making in an intimate partner rape trial.
    Lilley C; Willmott D; Mojtahedi D
    Front Psychiatry; 2022; 13():1086026. PubMed ID: 36727087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Generic prejudice and the presumption of guilt in sex abuse trials.
    Vidmar N
    Law Hum Behav; 1997 Feb; 21(1):5-25. PubMed ID: 9058572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Intoxicated But Not Incapacitated: Are There Effective Methods to Assist Juries in Interpreting Evidence of Voluntary Complainant Intoxication in Cases of Rape?
    Nitschke FT; Masser BM; McKimmie BM; Riachi M
    J Interpers Violence; 2021 May; 36(9-10):4335-4359. PubMed ID: 30058439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.