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 *

752 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17703354)

  • 21. Reaction of mock jurors to testimony of a court appointed expert.
    Cooper J; Hall J
    Behav Sci Law; 2000; 18(6):719-29. PubMed ID: 11180418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Saving damsels, sentencing deviants and selective chivalry decisions: juror decision-making in an ambiguous assault case.
    Meaux LT; Cox J; Kopkin MR
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2018; 25(5):724-736. PubMed ID: 31984048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Keep your bias to yourself: How deliberating with differently biased others affects mock-jurors' guilt decisions, perceptions of the defendant, memories, and evidence interpretation.
    Ruva CL; Guenther CC
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Oct; 41(5):478-493. PubMed ID: 28714733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The verdict on jury trials for juveniles: the effects of defendant's age on trial outcomes.
    Warling D; Peterson-Badali M
    Behav Sci Law; 2003; 21(1):63-82. PubMed ID: 12579618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The impact of juror characteristics and victim health status on the perception of elder physical abuse.
    Kinstle TL; Hodell EC; Golding JM
    J Interpers Violence; 2008 Sep; 23(9):1143-61. PubMed ID: 18272720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The impact of frequency of behavior and type of contact on judgments involving a criminal stalking case.
    Magyarics CL; Lynch KR; Golding JM; Lippert A
    Law Hum Behav; 2015 Dec; 39(6):602-13. PubMed ID: 26237334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Juror decision making in not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder trials: Effects of defendant gender and mental illness type.
    Mossière A; Maeder EM
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2016; 49(Pt A):47-54. PubMed ID: 27237958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The effects of motive information and crime unusualness on jurors' judgments in insanity cases.
    Pickel KL
    Law Hum Behav; 1998 Oct; 22(5):571-84. PubMed ID: 9833567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Abuse Is Abuse: The Influence of Type of Abuse, Victim Age, and Defendant Age on Juror Decision Making.
    Sheahan CL; Pica E; Pozzulo JD
    J Interpers Violence; 2021 Jan; 36(1-2):938-956. PubMed ID: 29294918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The influence of defendant race and mental disorder type on mock juror decision-making in insanity trials.
    Maeder EM; Yamamoto S; McLaughlin KJ
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2020; 68():101536. PubMed ID: 32033700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The impact of mock jury gender composition on deliberations and conviction rates in a child sexual assault trial.
    Golding JM; Bradshaw GS; Dunlap EE; Hodell EC
    Child Maltreat; 2007 May; 12(2):182-90. PubMed ID: 17446571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. Understanding pretrial publicity: predecisional distortion of evidence by mock jurors.
    Hope L; Memon A; McGeorge P
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2004 Jun; 10(2):111-9. PubMed ID: 15222805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The Failure of All Mothers or the Mother of All Failures? Juror Perceptions of Failure to Protect Laws.
    Stanziani M; Cox J
    J Interpers Violence; 2021 Jan; 36(1-2):NP690-NP711. PubMed ID: 29294952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Mock jury trials in Taiwan--paving the ground for introducing lay participation.
    Huang KC; Lin CC
    Law Hum Behav; 2014 Aug; 38(4):367-77. PubMed ID: 24707909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. Revisiting the insanity defense: contested or consensus?
    Cirincione C
    Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1996; 24(2):165-76. PubMed ID: 8807157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Informing reform: The views of legal professionals on the unique aspects of Scottish Law.
    Curley LJ; Munro J; Frumkin LA; Turner J
    Med Sci Law; 2021 Oct; 61(4):256-265. PubMed ID: 33596724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 38.