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.
768 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17703354)
1. A third verdict option: exploring the impact of the not proven verdict on mock juror decision making. Hope L; Greene E; Memon A; Gavisk M; Houston K Law Hum Behav; 2008 Jun; 32(3):241-52. PubMed ID: 17703354 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. The bastard verdict and its influence on jurors. Curley LJ; MacLean R; Murray J; Laybourn P; Brown D Med Sci Law; 2019 Jan; 59(1):26-35. PubMed ID: 30501474 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Proven and not proven: A potential alternative to the current Scottish verdict system. Curley LJ; Munro J; Turner J; Frumkin LA; Jackson E; Lages M Behav Sci Law; 2022 May; 40(3):452-466. PubMed ID: 35460096 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Effects of pretrial publicity on male and female jurors and judges in a mock rape trial. Riedel RG Psychol Rep; 1993 Dec; 73(3 Pt 1):819-32. PubMed ID: 8302986 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. In the aftermath of State v. Becker: a review of state and federal jury instructions on insanity acquittal disposition. Piel J J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2012; 40(4):537-46. PubMed ID: 23233476 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Town vs. gown: a direct comparison of community residents and student mock jurors. Hosch HM; Culhane SE; Tubb VA; Granillo EA Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):452-66. PubMed ID: 21351133 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
15. Informed decision making in persons acquitted not guilty by reason of insanity. Elliott RL; Nelson E; Fitch WL; Scott R; Wolber G; Singh R Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1993; 21(3):309-20. PubMed ID: 8148513 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The relationship between verdict, defendant characteristics, and type of crime in sex-related criminal cases. Beck JC; Borenstein N; Dreyfus J Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1986; 14(2):141-6. PubMed ID: 3730627 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [The influence of decision task and deliberation style on the verdict of the juries]. Martín ME; de la Fuente EI; García J; De la Fuente L Psicothema; 2006 Nov; 18(4):772-7. PubMed ID: 17296116 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. The guilty but mentally ill verdict: a review and conceptual analysis of intent and impact. Palmer CA; Hazelrigg M J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2000; 28(1):47-54. PubMed ID: 10774841 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Are consistent juror decisions related to fast and frugal decision making? Investigating the relationship between juror consistency, decision speed and cue utilisation. Curley LJ; Murray J; MacLean R; Laybourn P Med Sci Law; 2017 Oct; 57(4):211-219. PubMed ID: 28992745 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]