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 *

271 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16718577)

  • 41. The court for sexual offences: perceptions of the perpetrators of sexual offences.
    Walker SP; Louw DA
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2006; 29(4):306-15. PubMed ID: 16546256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Polygraph testing for deception in Australia: effective aid to crime investigation and adjudication?
    McMahon M
    J Law Med; 2003 Aug; 11(1):24-47. PubMed ID: 14526725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. The emotional child witness: effects on juror decision-making.
    Cooper A; Quas JA; Cleveland KC
    Behav Sci Law; 2014; 32(6):813-28. PubMed ID: 25537438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. A survey of people's attitudes and beliefs about false confessions.
    Henkel LA; Coffman KA; Dailey EM
    Behav Sci Law; 2008; 26(5):555-84. PubMed ID: 18788081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Tonic arousal during field polygraph tests in guilty vs. innocent suspects in Japan.
    Hira S; Furumitsu I
    Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback; 2009 Sep; 34(3):173-6. PubMed ID: 19499326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. The effect of gender in the perception of elder physical abuse in court.
    Golding JM; Yozwiak JA; Kinstle TL; Marsil DF
    Law Hum Behav; 2005 Oct; 29(5):605-14. PubMed ID: 16254745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. 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]  

  • 48. Secondary confessions: the influence (or lack thereof) of incentive size and scientific expert testimony on jurors' perceptions of informant testimony.
    Maeder EM; Pica E
    Law Hum Behav; 2014 Dec; 38(6):560-8. PubMed ID: 25180762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Polygraph. Council on Scientific Affairs.
    JAMA; 1986 Sep; 256(9):1172-5. PubMed ID: 3735653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. A trap for the unwary: jury decision making in cases involving the entrapment defense.
    Peters CS; Lampinen JM; Malesky LA
    Law Hum Behav; 2013 Feb; 37(1):45-53. PubMed ID: 22775305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A prospective study of the impact of polygraphy on high-risk behaviors in adult sex offenders.
    Grubin D; Madsen L; Parsons S; Sosnowski D; Warberg B
    Sex Abuse; 2004 Jun; 16(3):209-22. PubMed ID: 15326881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Polygraph testing--a comprehensive literature review of an ethical dilemma.
    Pink LA; Kotzan JA
    Am J Pharm Educ; 1986; 50(2):175-80. PubMed ID: 10300927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Clark v. Arizona: diminishing the right of mentally ill individuals to a full and fair defense.
    Wortzel H; Metzner J
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2006; 34(4):545-8. PubMed ID: 17185487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation: knowledge and opinions among the U.S. general public. State of the science-fiction.
    Marco CA; Larkin GL
    Resuscitation; 2008 Dec; 79(3):490-8. PubMed ID: 18990479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Negative and positive pretrial publicity affect juror memory and decision making.
    Ruva CL; McEvoy C
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2008 Sep; 14(3):226-35. PubMed ID: 18808276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Chaos in the courtroom reconsidered: emotional bias and juror nullification.
    Horowitz IA; Kerr NL; Park ES; Gockel C
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Apr; 30(2):163-81. PubMed ID: 16786405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. [The normative concept of guilt in criminal law between freedom of will and neurobiological determinism].
    Czerner F
    Arch Kriminol; 2006; 218(5-6):129-57. PubMed ID: 17217181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. The impact on juror verdicts of judicial instruction to disregard inadmissible evidence: a meta-analysis.
    Steblay N; Hosch HM; Culhane SE; McWethy A
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Aug; 30(4):469-92. PubMed ID: 16906469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. 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]  

  • 60. The influence of a defendant's body weight on perceptions of guilt.
    Schvey NA; Puhl RM; Levandoski KA; Brownell KD
    Int J Obes (Lond); 2013 Sep; 37(9):1275-81. PubMed ID: 23295503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.