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 *

286 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12645046)

  • 21. The biasing effect of the "sexually violent predator" label on legal decisions.
    Scurich N; Gongola J; Krauss DA
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2016; 47():109-14. PubMed ID: 27206709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Credibility in the courtroom: how likeable should an expert witness be?
    Brodsky SL; Neal TM; Cramer RJ; Ziemke MH
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2009; 37(4):525-32. PubMed ID: 20019000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effects of defendant sexual orientation on jurors' perceptions of child sexual assault.
    Wiley TR; Bottoms BL
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Feb; 33(1):46-60. PubMed ID: 18404363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Risk assessment communication difficulties: An empirical examination of the effects of categorical versus probabilistic risk communication in sexually violent predator decisions.
    Krauss DA; Cook GI; Klapatch L
    Behav Sci Law; 2018 Sep; 36(5):532-553. PubMed ID: 30294807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Kansas v. Hendricks.
    Grudzinskas AJ; Henry MG
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1997; 25(4):607-12. PubMed ID: 9460048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Violent sex offenses: how are they best measured from official records?
    Rice ME; Harris GT; Lang C; Cormier C
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Aug; 30(4):525-41. PubMed ID: 16770703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Decision-making about volitional impairment in sexually violent predators.
    Mercado CC; Bornstein BH; Schopp RF
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Oct; 30(5):587-602. PubMed ID: 16951926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Preventative detention decisions: reliance on expert assessments and evidence of partisan allegiance within the Canadian context.
    Blais J
    Behav Sci Law; 2015 Feb; 33(1):74-91. PubMed ID: 25693952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. The impact of mental health evidence on support for capital punishment: are defendants labeled psychopathic considered more deserving of death?
    Edens JF; Colwell LH; Desforges DM; Fernandez K
    Behav Sci Law; 2005; 23(5):603-25. PubMed ID: 16170787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Loathing the sinner, medicalizing the sin: why sexually violent predator statutes are unjust.
    Douard J
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2007; 30(1):36-48. PubMed ID: 17157910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Sexual predator civil commitment: a comparison of selected and released offenders.
    Levenson JS
    Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2004 Dec; 48(6):638-48. PubMed ID: 15538023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. Commentary: inventing diagnosis for civil commitment of rapists.
    Zander TK
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2008; 36(4):459-69. PubMed ID: 19092062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Factors predicting selection of sexually violent predators for civil commitment.
    Levenson JS; Morin JW
    Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2006 Dec; 50(6):609-29. PubMed ID: 17068188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Hearsay versus children's testimony: Effects of truthful and deceptive statements on jurors' decisions.
    Goodman GS; Myers JE; Qin J; Quas JA; Castelli P; Redlich AD; Rogers L
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Jun; 30(3):363-401. PubMed ID: 16779675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Expert witness confidence and juror personality: their impact on credibility and persuasion in the courtroom.
    Cramer RJ; Brodsky SL; DeCoster J
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2009; 37(1):63-74. PubMed ID: 19297636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Gruesome evidence and emotion: anger, blame, and jury decision-making.
    Bright DA; Goodman-Delahunty J
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Apr; 30(2):183-202. PubMed ID: 16786406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Sexually violent predators and civil commitment laws.
    Kendall WD; Cheung M
    J Child Sex Abus; 2004; 13(2):41-57. PubMed ID: 15388411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.