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 *

278 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19152544)

  • 1. On the presumption of evidentiary independence: can confessions corrupt eyewitness identifications?
    Hasel LE; Kassin SM
    Psychol Sci; 2009 Jan; 20(1):122-6. PubMed ID: 19152544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The impact of eyewitness identifications from simultaneous and sequential lineups.
    Wright DB
    Memory; 2007 Oct; 15(7):746-54. PubMed ID: 17852725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Lineup administrator influences on eyewitness identification decisions.
    Clark SE; Marshall TE; Rosenthal R
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2009 Mar; 15(1):63-75. PubMed ID: 19309217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Investigating investigators: how presentation order influences participant-investigators' interpretations of eyewitness identification and alibi evidence.
    Dahl LC; Brimacombe CA; Lindsay DS
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Oct; 33(5):368-80. PubMed ID: 18810615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cueing confidence in eyewitness identifications: influence of biased lineup instructions and pre-identification memory feedback under varying lineup conditions.
    Leippe MR; Eisenstadt D; Rauch SM
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Jun; 33(3):194-212. PubMed ID: 18600436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Retrieval does not always enhance suggestibility: testing can improve witness identification performance.
    LaPaglia JA; Chan JC
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Dec; 36(6):478-87. PubMed ID: 23205595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Effects of defendant age on severity of punishment for different crimes.
    Bergeron CE; McKelvie SJ
    J Soc Psychol; 2004 Feb; 144(1):75-90. PubMed ID: 14760966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Probative value of absolute and relative judgments in eyewitness identification.
    Clark SE; Erickson MA; Breneman J
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Oct; 35(5):364-80. PubMed ID: 20953683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. The impact of multiple show-ups on eyewitness decision-making and innocence risk.
    Smith AM; Bertrand M; Lindsay RC; Kalmet N; Grossman D; Provenzano D
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2014 Sep; 20(3):247-59. PubMed ID: 24820149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The Psychology of Confessions: A Review of the Literature and Issues.
    Kassin SM; Gudjonsson GH
    Psychol Sci Public Interest; 2004 Nov; 5(2):33-67. PubMed ID: 26158993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An explanation for camera perspective bias in voluntariness judgment for video-recorded confession: Suggestion of cognitive frame.
    Park K; Pyo J
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Jun; 36(3):184-94. PubMed ID: 22667808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. On the power of confession evidence: an experimental test of the fundamental difference hypothesis.
    Kassin SM; Neumann K
    Law Hum Behav; 1997 Oct; 21(5):469-84. PubMed ID: 9374602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Biased lineup instructions and face identification from video images.
    Thompson WB; Johnson J
    J Gen Psychol; 2008 Jan; 135(1):23-36. PubMed ID: 18318406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. How factors present during the immediate interrogation situation produce short-sighted confession decisions.
    Madon S; Yang Y; Smalarz L; Guyll M; Scherr KC
    Law Hum Behav; 2013 Feb; 37(1):60-74. PubMed ID: 22924468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Why confessions trump innocence.
    Kassin SM
    Am Psychol; 2012 Sep; 67(6):431-45. PubMed ID: 22545597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Defendant stereotypicality moderates the effect of confession evidence on judgments of guilt.
    Smalarz L; Madon S; Turosak A
    Law Hum Behav; 2018 Aug; 42(4):355-368. PubMed ID: 29939062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. False confessions: causes, consequences, and implications.
    Leo RA
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2009; 37(3):332-43. PubMed ID: 19767498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Sequential lineup presentation promotes less-biased criterion setting but does not improve discriminability.
    Palmer MA; Brewer N
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Jun; 36(3):247-55. PubMed ID: 22667814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.