BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

269 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19391102)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Science in the jury box: jurors' comprehension of mitochondrial DNA evidence.
    Hans VP; Kaye DH; Dann BM; Farley EJ; Albertson S
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Feb; 35(1):60-71. PubMed ID: 20461543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Eliminating the Competency Presumption in Juvenile Delinquency Cases.
    Katner DR
    Cornell J Law Public Policy; 2015; 24(3):403-50. PubMed ID: 26809160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Gender differences in jurors' perceptions of infanticide involving disabled and non-disabled infant victims.
    Bottoms BL; Kalder AK; Stevenson MC; Oudekerk BA; Wiley TR; Perona A
    Child Abuse Negl; 2011 Feb; 35(2):127-41. PubMed ID: 21354621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The court of public opinion: lay perceptions of polygraph testing.
    Myers B; Latter R; Abdollahi-Arena MK
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Aug; 30(4):509-23. PubMed ID: 16718577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The effect of confession evidence on jurors' verdict decisions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Mindthoff A; Ferreira PA; Meissner CA
    Law Hum Behav; 2024 Jun; 48(3):163-181. PubMed ID: 38949764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Judgments of culpability in a filicide scenario.
    Ferguson CJ; Miller-Stratton H; Heinrich E; Fritz S; Smith S
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2008; 31(1):41-50. PubMed ID: 18158184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Effects of an alibi witness's relationship to the defendant on mock jurors' judgments.
    Hosch HM; Culhane SE; Jolly KW; Chavez RM; Shaw LH
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Apr; 35(2):127-42. PubMed ID: 20411316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Conduct and its consequences: attempts at debiasing jury judgments.
    Smith AC; Greene E
    Law Hum Behav; 2005 Oct; 29(5):505-26. PubMed ID: 16254740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Mock Jurors' Perceptions of Sexual Assault on a University Campus.
    Pica E; Sheahan CL; Pozzulo J
    J Interpers Violence; 2021 May; 36(9-10):NP5447-NP5465. PubMed ID: 30239260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Jurors' perceptions of adolescent sexual assault victims who have intellectual disabilities.
    Bottoms BL; Nysse-Carris KL; Harris T; Tyda K
    Law Hum Behav; 2003 Apr; 27(2):205-27. PubMed ID: 12733422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Juror perceptions of child eyewitness testimony in a sexual abuse trial.
    Holcomb MJ; Jacquin KM
    J Child Sex Abus; 2007; 16(2):79-95. PubMed ID: 17895233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Correlates of Competency to Stand Trial Among Youths Admitted to a Juvenile Mental Health Court.
    Bath E; Reba-Harrelson L; Peace R; Shen J; Liu H
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2015 Sep; 43(3):329-39. PubMed ID: 26438811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Constructing insanity: jurors' prototypes, attitudes, and legal decision-making.
    Louden JE; Skeem JL
    Behav Sci Law; 2007; 25(4):449-70. PubMed ID: 17506086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. False-evidence ploys and interrogations: mock jurors' perceptions of false-evidence ploy type, deception, coercion, and justification.
    Forrest KD; Woody WD; Brady SE; Batterman KC; Stastny BJ; Bruns JA
    Behav Sci Law; 2012; 30(3):342-64. PubMed ID: 22315159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Suspect confession of child sexual abuse to investigators.
    Lippert T; Cross TP; Jones L; Walsh W
    Child Maltreat; 2010 May; 15(2):161-70. PubMed ID: 20410024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Commentary: ethics-related implications and neurobiological correlates of false confessions in juveniles.
    Weinstock R; Thompson C
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2009; 37(3):344-8. PubMed ID: 19767499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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