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 *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15968710)

  • 1. Juror reactions to jury duty: perceptions of the system and potential stressors.
    Bornstein BH; Miller MK; Nemeth RJ; Page GL; Musil S
    Behav Sci Law; 2005; 23(3):321-46. PubMed ID: 15968710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Juror stress: identification and intervention.
    Feldmann TB; Bell RA
    Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1993; 21(4):409-17. PubMed ID: 8054671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Impact of Evidence Type and Judicial Warning on Juror Perceptions of Global and Specific Witness Evidence.
    Wheatcroft JM; Keogan H
    J Psychol; 2017 Apr; 151(3):247-267. PubMed ID: 27982750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Judging jury service: results of the North Carolina administrative office of the courts juror survey.
    Cutler BL; Hughes DM
    Behav Sci Law; 2001; 19(2):305-20. PubMed ID: 11385704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The occupational hazards of jury duty.
    Kaplan SM; Winget C
    Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1992; 20(3):325-33. PubMed ID: 1421562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Estimating juror accuracy, juror ability, and the relationship between them.
    Park K
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Aug; 35(4):288-305. PubMed ID: 20658261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. How reason for surgery and patient weight affect verdicts and perceptions in medical malpractice trials: a comparison of students and jurors.
    Reichert J; Miller MK; Bornstein BH; Shelton HD
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):395-418. PubMed ID: 21308752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Studying perceptions of juror influence in vivo: a social relations analysis.
    Marcus DK; Lyons PM; Guyton MR
    Law Hum Behav; 2000 Apr; 24(2):173-86. PubMed ID: 10810837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effects of rehabilitative voir dire on juror bias and decision making.
    Crocker CB; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2010 Jun; 34(3):212-26. PubMed ID: 19644740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Perceptions of domestic violence and mock jurors' sentencing decisions.
    Kern R; Libkuman TM; Temple SL
    J Interpers Violence; 2007 Dec; 22(12):1515-35. PubMed ID: 17993639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Mosaic or Melting Pot? Race and Juror Decision Making in Canada and the United States.
    Maeder EM; McManus LA
    J Interpers Violence; 2022 Jan; 37(1-2):NP991-NP1012. PubMed ID: 32401133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The Mnemonic Consequences of Jurors' Selective Retrieval During Deliberation.
    Jay ACV; Stone CB; Meksin R; Merck C; Gordon NS; Hirst W
    Top Cogn Sci; 2019 Oct; 11(4):627-643. PubMed ID: 31231981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effect of jury deliberations on jurors' propensity to disregard inadmissible evidence.
    London K; Nunez N
    J Appl Psychol; 2000 Dec; 85(6):932-9. PubMed ID: 11125657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors.
    Carlson KA; Russo JE
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2001 Jun; 7(2):91-103. PubMed ID: 11477983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Generational and age-based differences in attitudes towards jury service.
    Boatright RG
    Behav Sci Law; 2001; 19(2):285-304. PubMed ID: 11385703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.