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 *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12508700)

  • 21. The impact of graphic photographic evidence on mock jurors' decisions in a murder trial: probative or prejudicial?
    Douglas KS; Lyon DR; Ogloff JR
    Law Hum Behav; 1997 Oct; 21(5):485-501. PubMed ID: 9374603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. An analysis of the effects of subjective and objective instruction forms on mock-juries' murder/manslaughter distinctions.
    Spackman MP; Belcher JC; Calapp JW; Taylor A
    Law Hum Behav; 2002 Dec; 26(6):605-23. PubMed ID: 12508697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Commentary: Perception of remorse by mock jurors in a capital murder trial.
    Batista LM; Myers W
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2012; 40(1):55-8. PubMed ID: 22396342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Reaction of mock jurors to testimony of a court appointed expert.
    Cooper J; Hall J
    Behav Sci Law; 2000; 18(6):719-29. PubMed ID: 11180418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Educating Jurors about Forensic Evidence: Using an Expert Witness and Judicial Instructions to Mitigate the Impact of Invalid Forensic Science Testimony.
    Eastwood J; Caldwell J
    J Forensic Sci; 2015 Nov; 60(6):1523-8. PubMed ID: 26234166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. When jurors' moral judgments result in jury nullification: moral outrage at the law as a mediator of euthanasia attitudes on verdicts.
    Peter-Hagene LC; Ratliff CL
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2021; 28(1):27-49. PubMed ID: 34552378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Chaos in the courtroom reconsidered: emotional bias and juror nullification.
    Horowitz IA; Kerr NL; Park ES; Gockel C
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Apr; 30(2):163-81. PubMed ID: 16786405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The effect of the deliberation process and jurors' prior legal knowledge on the sentence: the role of psychological expertise and crime scene photo.
    Finkelstein R; Bastounis M
    Behav Sci Law; 2010; 28(3):426-41. PubMed ID: 20014448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Jurors' perceptions of forensic science expert witnesses: Experience, qualifications, testimony style and credibility.
    McCarthy Wilcox A; NicDaeid N
    Forensic Sci Int; 2018 Oct; 291():100-108. PubMed ID: 30216840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. Unloading the hired gun: Inoculation effects in expert witness testimony.
    Ziemke MH; Brodsky SL
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2015; 42-43():91-7. PubMed ID: 26299600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The impact of negative forensic evidence on mock jurors' perceptions of a trial of drug-facilitated sexual assault.
    Jenkins G; Schuller RA
    Law Hum Behav; 2007 Aug; 31(4):369-80. PubMed ID: 17211690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. Deconstructing the simplification of jury instructions: How simplifying the features of complexity affects jurors' application of instructions.
    Baguley CM; McKimmie BM; Masser BM
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Jun; 41(3):284-304. PubMed ID: 28182459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Relations among mock jurors' attitudes, trial evidence, and their selections of an insanity defense verdict: a path analytic approach.
    Poulson RL; Brondino MJ; Brown H; Braithwaite RL
    Psychol Rep; 1998 Feb; 82(1):3-16. PubMed ID: 9520530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Mock Jurors' Perceptions of Child Sexual Abuse Cases: Investigating the Role of Delayed Disclosure and Relationship to the Perpetrator.
    Miller QC; Call AA; London K
    J Interpers Violence; 2022 Dec; 37(23-24):NP23374-NP23396. PubMed ID: 35285346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. The effect of acknowledging mock jurors' feelings on affective and cognitive biases: it depends on the sample.
    McCabe JG; Krauss DA
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):331-57. PubMed ID: 21766326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.