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 *

259 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16254744)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Biased lineups: sequential presentation reduces the problem.
    Lindsay RC; Lea JA; Nosworthy GJ; Fulford JA; Hector J; LeVan V; Seabrook C
    J Appl Psychol; 1991 Dec; 76(6):796-802. PubMed ID: 1774217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Instruction bias and lineup presentation moderate the effects of administrator knowledge on eyewitness identification.
    Greathouse SM; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Feb; 33(1):70-82. PubMed ID: 18594956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The effects of local and global processing orientation on eyewitness identification performance.
    Perfect TJ; Dennis I; Snell A
    Memory; 2007 Oct; 15(7):784-98. PubMed ID: 17852730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Field experiments on eyewitness identification: towards a better understanding of pitfalls and prospects.
    Wells GL
    Law Hum Behav; 2008 Feb; 32(1):6-10. PubMed ID: 17610051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Investigating investigators: examining the impact of eyewitness identification evidence on student-investigators.
    Boyce MA; Lindsay DS; Brimacombe CA
    Law Hum Behav; 2008 Oct; 32(5):439-53. PubMed ID: 18060486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. How variations in distance affect eyewitness reports and identification accuracy.
    Lindsay RC; Semmler C; Weber N; Brewer N; Lindsay MR
    Law Hum Behav; 2008 Dec; 32(6):526-35. PubMed ID: 18253819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Confidence-accuracy calibration in absolute and relative face recognition judgments.
    Weber N; Brewer N
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2004 Sep; 10(3):156-72. PubMed ID: 15462618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Eyewitness accuracy rates in sequential and simultaneous lineup presentations: a meta-analytic comparison.
    Steblay N; Dysart J; Fulero S; Lindsay RC
    Law Hum Behav; 2001 Oct; 25(5):459-73. PubMed ID: 11688368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Effects of administrator-witness contact on eyewitness identification accuracy.
    Haw RM; Fisher RP
    J Appl Psychol; 2004 Dec; 89(6):1106-12. PubMed ID: 15584846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Absolute-judgment models better predict eyewitness decision-making than do relative-judgment models.
    Smith AM; Ying RC; Goldstein AR; Fitzgerald RJ
    Cognition; 2024 Jul; 251():105877. PubMed ID: 39002429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Investigating investigators: examining witnesses' influence on investigators.
    Dahl LC; Lindsay DS; Brimacombe CA
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Dec; 30(6):707-32. PubMed ID: 16741634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Creating fair lineups for suspects with distinctive features.
    Zarkadi T; Wade KA; Stewart N
    Psychol Sci; 2009 Dec; 20(12):1448-53. PubMed ID: 19883492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Backloading in the sequential lineup prevents within-lineup criterion shifts that undermine eyewitness identification performance.
    Horry R; Palmer MA; Brewer N
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2012 Dec; 18(4):346-60. PubMed ID: 22924858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The information gained from witnesses' responses to an initial "blank" lineup.
    Palmer MA; Brewer N; Weber N
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Oct; 36(5):439-47. PubMed ID: 22468758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Eyewitness lineups: is the appearance-change instruction a good idea?
    Charman SD; Wells GL
    Law Hum Behav; 2007 Feb; 31(1):3-22. PubMed ID: 16612580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Children's metacognitive judgments in an eyewitness identification task.
    Keast A; Brewer N; Wells GL
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2007 Aug; 97(4):286-314. PubMed ID: 17512942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.