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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16254742)

  • 21. Can eyewitnesses correct for external influences on their lineup identifications? The actual/counterfactual assessment paradigm.
    Charman SD; Wells GL
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2008 Mar; 14(1):5-20. PubMed ID: 18377163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Does post-identification feedback affect evaluations of eyewitness testimony and identification procedures?
    Douglass AB; Neuschatz JS; Imrich J; Wilkinson M
    Law Hum Behav; 2010 Aug; 34(4):282-94. PubMed ID: 19585229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Postidentification feedback affects real eyewitnesses.
    Wright DB; Skagerberg EM
    Psychol Sci; 2007 Feb; 18(2):172-8. PubMed ID: 17425539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. What we know now: the Evanston Illinois field lineups.
    Steblay NK
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Feb; 35(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 20177754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Cueing confidence in eyewitness identifications: influence of biased lineup instructions and pre-identification memory feedback under varying lineup conditions.
    Leippe MR; Eisenstadt D; Rauch SM
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Jun; 33(3):194-212. PubMed ID: 18600436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. PC_Eyewitness and the sequential superiority effect: computer-based lineup administration.
    MacLin OH; Zimmerman LA; Malpass RS
    Law Hum Behav; 2005 Jun; 29(3):303-21. PubMed ID: 15965630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The impact of eyewitness identifications from simultaneous and sequential lineups.
    Wright DB
    Memory; 2007 Oct; 15(7):746-54. PubMed ID: 17852725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Fast and confident: postdicting eyewitness identification accuracy in a field study.
    Sauerland M; Sporer SL
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2009 Mar; 15(1):46-62. PubMed ID: 19309216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Postidentification feedback affects subsequent eyewitness identification performance.
    Palmer MA; Brewer N; Weber N
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2010 Dec; 16(4):387-98. PubMed ID: 21198255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Children's identification of faces from lineups: the effects of lineup presentation and instructions on accuracy.
    Beresford J; Blades M
    J Appl Psychol; 2006 Sep; 91(5):1102-13. PubMed ID: 16953771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Suspect/foil identification in actual crimes and in the laboratory: a reality monitoring analysis.
    Behrman BW; Richards RE
    Law Hum Behav; 2005 Jun; 29(3):279-301. PubMed ID: 15965629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The effect of lineup member similarity on recognition accuracy in simultaneous and sequential lineups.
    Flowe HD; Ebbesen EB
    Law Hum Behav; 2007 Feb; 31(1):33-52. PubMed ID: 17123159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Distorted retrospective eyewitness reports as functions of feedback and delay.
    Wells GL; Olson EA; Charman SD
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2003 Mar; 9(1):42-52. PubMed ID: 12710837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Predictors of eyewitness identification decisions from video lineups in England: a field study.
    Horry R; Memon A; Wright DB; Milne R
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Aug; 36(4):257-65. PubMed ID: 22849411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The effect of visual task difficulty and attentional direction on the detection of acoustic change as indexed by the Mismatch Negativity.
    Muller-Gass A; Stelmack RM; Campbell KB
    Brain Res; 2006 Mar; 1078(1):112-30. PubMed ID: 16497283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Investigating investigators: how presentation order influences participant-investigators' interpretations of eyewitness identification and alibi evidence.
    Dahl LC; Brimacombe CA; Lindsay DS
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Oct; 33(5):368-80. PubMed ID: 18810615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Are multiple-trial experiments appropriate for eyewitness identification studies? Accuracy, choosing, and confidence across trials.
    Mansour JK; Beaudry JL; Lindsay RCL
    Behav Res Methods; 2017 Dec; 49(6):2235-2254. PubMed ID: 28432569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Identification accuracy for single- and double-perpetrator crimes: does accomplice gender matter?
    Megreya AM; Bindemann M
    Br J Psychol; 2012 Nov; 103(4):439-53. PubMed ID: 23034106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Eyewitness Evidence: Improving Its Probative Value.
    Wells GL; Memon A; Penrod SD
    Psychol Sci Public Interest; 2006 Nov; 7(2):45-75. PubMed ID: 26158855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Eyewitness identification accuracy and response latency: the unruly 10-12-second rule.
    Weber N; Brewer N; Wells GL; Semmler C; Keast A
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2004 Sep; 10(3):139-47. PubMed ID: 15462616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.