990 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17940854)
1. The effectiveness of opposing expert witnesses for educating jurors about unreliable expert evidence.
Levett LM; Kovera MB
Law Hum Behav; 2008 Aug; 32(4):363-74. PubMed ID: 17940854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Educating Jurors about Forensic Evidence: Using an Expert Witness and Judicial Instructions to Mitigate the Impact of Invalid Forensic Science Testimony.
Eastwood J; Caldwell J
J Forensic Sci; 2015 Nov; 60(6):1523-8. PubMed ID: 26234166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Timing of eyewitness expert testimony, jurors' need for cognition, and case strength as determinants of trial verdicts.
Leippe MR; Eisenstadt D; Rauch SM; Seib HM
J Appl Psychol; 2004 Jun; 89(3):524-41. PubMed ID: 15161410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Neurolitigation: a perspective on the elements of expert testimony for extending the Daubert challenge.
Klee CH; Friedman HJ
NeuroRehabilitation; 2001; 16(2):79-85. PubMed ID: 11568465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Expert testimony regarding child witnesses: does it sensitize jurors to forensic interview quality?
Buck JA; London K; Wright DB
Law Hum Behav; 2011 Apr; 35(2):152-64. PubMed ID: 20443056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Psychiatric evidence on the ultimate issue.
Buchanan A
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2006; 34(1):14-21. PubMed ID: 16585229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. False confessions, expert testimony, and admissibility.
Watson C; Weiss KJ; Pouncey C
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2010; 38(2):174-86. PubMed ID: 20542936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Expert testimony in capital sentencing: juror responses.
Montgomery JH; Ciccone JR; Garvey SP; Eisenberg T
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2005; 33(4):509-18. PubMed ID: 16394228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Credibility in the courtroom: how likeable should an expert witness be?
Brodsky SL; Neal TM; Cramer RJ; Ziemke MH
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2009; 37(4):525-32. PubMed ID: 20019000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Battered women who kill: the impact of expert testimony and empathy induction in the courtroom.
Plumm KM; Terrance CA
Violence Against Women; 2009 Feb; 15(2):186-205. PubMed ID: 19126834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Medical expert opinion--credibility, ethics, remuneration].
Sahar A
Harefuah; 2007 Jul; 146(7):534-6, 574, 473. PubMed ID: 17803167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Jurors' views on the value and objectivity of mental health experts testifying in sexually violent predator trials.
Boccaccini MT; Murrie DC; Turner DB
Behav Sci Law; 2014; 32(4):483-95. PubMed ID: 25043830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of false-evidence ploys and expert testimony on jurors' verdicts, recommended sentences, and perceptions of confession evidence.
Woody WD; Forrest KD
Behav Sci Law; 2009; 27(3):333-60. PubMed ID: 19405020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Admissibility of scientific evidence post-Daubert.
Masten J; Strzelczyk JJ
Health Phys; 2001 Dec; 81(6):678-82. PubMed ID: 11725886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Application of the Supreme Court's Daubert criteria in radiation litigation.
Merwin SE; Moeller DW; Kennedy WE; Moeller MP
Health Phys; 2001 Dec; 81(6):670-7. PubMed ID: 11725885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI) and expert testimony.
Kulich R; Maciewicz R; Scrivani SJ
Pain Med; 2009 Mar; 10(2):373-80. PubMed ID: 19254335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The bottom line: the effect of written expert witness statements on juror verdicts and information processing.
ForsterLee L; Horowitz I; Athaide-Victor E; Brown N
Law Hum Behav; 2000 Apr; 24(2):259-70. PubMed ID: 10810841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The effects of rational and experiential information processing of expert testimony in death penalty cases.
Krauss DA; Lieberman JD; Olson J
Behav Sci Law; 2004; 22(6):801-22. PubMed ID: 15568199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The role of death qualification and need for cognition in venirepersons' evaluations of expert scientific testimony in capital trials.
Butler B; Moran G
Behav Sci Law; 2007; 25(4):561-71. PubMed ID: 17440900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Mock jurors' evaluation of firearm examiner testimony.
Garrett BL; Scurich N; Crozier WE
Law Hum Behav; 2020 Oct; 44(5):412-423. PubMed ID: 33090867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
