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.
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]