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 *

203 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12061623)

  • 1. Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and eyewitness confidence on mock-juror judgments.
    Brewer N; Burke A
    Law Hum Behav; 2002 Jun; 26(3):353-64. PubMed ID: 12061623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of an alibi witness's relationship to the defendant on mock jurors' judgments.
    Hosch HM; Culhane SE; Jolly KW; Chavez RM; Shaw LH
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Apr; 35(2):127-42. PubMed ID: 20411316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Crime Scene Familiarity: Does it Influence Mock Jurors' Decisions?
    Pica E; Pozzulo J
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2017; 24(5):745-759. PubMed ID: 31983986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effects of mood and emotion on juror processing and judgments.
    Semmler C; Brewer N
    Behav Sci Law; 2002; 20(4):423-36. PubMed ID: 12210977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Impact of defense-only and opposing eyewitness experts on juror judgments.
    Devenport JL; Cutler BL
    Law Hum Behav; 2004 Oct; 28(5):569-76. PubMed ID: 15638210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Eyewitness confidence and mock juror decisions of guilt: A meta-analytic review.
    Slane CR; Dodson CS
    Law Hum Behav; 2022 Feb; 46(1):45-66. PubMed ID: 35073115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. How jurors use and misuse character evidence.
    Hunt JS; Budesheim TL
    J Appl Psychol; 2004 Apr; 89(2):347-61. PubMed ID: 15065980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Juror sensitivity to the cross-race effect.
    Abshire J; Bornstein BH
    Law Hum Behav; 2003 Oct; 27(5):471-80. PubMed ID: 14593793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effects of motive information and crime unusualness on jurors' judgments in insanity cases.
    Pickel KL
    Law Hum Behav; 1998 Oct; 22(5):571-84. PubMed ID: 9833567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. How effective are the cross-examination and expert testimony safeguards? Jurors' perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures.
    Devenport JL; Stinson V; Cutler BL; Kravitz DA
    J Appl Psychol; 2002 Dec; 87(6):1042-54. PubMed ID: 12558212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Mock jurors' awareness of age-related changes in memory and cognitive capacity.
    Martschuk N; Sporer SL
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2020; 27(3):441-464. PubMed ID: 33071551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Viewing videotaped identification procedure increases juror sensitivity to single-blind photo-array administration.
    Modjadidi K; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2018 Jun; 42(3):244-257. PubMed ID: 29809027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Expert testimony influences juror decisions in criminal trials involving recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse.
    Khurshid A; Jacquin KM
    J Child Sex Abus; 2013; 22(8):949-67. PubMed ID: 24283545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 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. Effects of a proven error on evaluations of witness testimony.
    Lavis T; Brewer N
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Jun; 41(3):314-323. PubMed ID: 27685643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Can jurors be biased in their evaluation of third-party evidence within cases of rape?
    Parsons A; Mojtahedi D
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2022; 85():101837. PubMed ID: 36122514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The influence of sex on mock jurors' verdicts across type of child abuse cases.
    Pettalia J; Pozzulo JD; Reed J
    Child Abuse Negl; 2017 Jul; 69():1-9. PubMed ID: 28415027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. What Evidence Matters to Jurors? The Prevalence and Importance of Different Homicide Trial Evidence to Mock Jurors.
    Schweitzer K; Nuñez N
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2018; 25(3):437-451. PubMed ID: 31984031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.