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 *

162 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20382916)

  • 1. The promise of a cognitive perspective on jury deliberation.
    Salerno JM; Diamond SS
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2010 Apr; 17(2):174-9. PubMed ID: 20382916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Jurors' cognitive depletion and performance during jury deliberation as a function of jury diversity and defendant race.
    Peter-Hagene L
    Law Hum Behav; 2019 Jun; 43(3):232-249. PubMed ID: 31120276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effects of jury size and polling method on the process and product of jury deliberation.
    Kerr NL; MacCoun RJ
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 1985 Feb; 48(2):349-63. PubMed ID: 3981399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The power of meaningful numbers: Attorney guidance and jury deliberation improve the reliability and gist validity of damage awards.
    Reed K; Hans VP; Rotenstein V; Helm RK; Rodriguez A; McKendall P; Reyna VF
    Law Hum Behav; 2024 Apr; 48(2):83-103. PubMed ID: 38602803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Inferring models of opinion dynamics from aggregated jury data.
    Burghardt K; Rand W; Girvan M
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(7):e0218312. PubMed ID: 31260463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evidentiary, extraevidentiary, and deliberation process predictors of real jury verdicts.
    Devine DJ; Krouse PC; Cavanaugh CM; Basora JC
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Dec; 40(6):670-682. PubMed ID: 27598561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effects of juror anonymity on jury verdicts.
    Hazelwood DL; Brigham JC
    Law Hum Behav; 1998 Dec; 22(6):695-713. PubMed ID: 9874929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Impact of information and deliberation on the consistency of preferences for prioritization in health care - evidence from discrete choice experiments undertaken alongside citizens' juries.
    Whitty JA; Littlejohns P; Ratcliffe J; Rixon K; Wilson A; Kendall E; Burton P; Chalkidou K; Scuffham PA
    J Med Econ; 2023; 26(1):1237-1249. PubMed ID: 37738383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation: jurors' bias for leniency.
    MacCoun RJ; Kerr NL
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 1988 Jan; 54(1):21-33. PubMed ID: 3346806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Mnemonic Consequences of Jurors' Selective Retrieval During Deliberation.
    Jay ACV; Stone CB; Meksin R; Merck C; Gordon NS; Hirst W
    Top Cogn Sci; 2019 Oct; 11(4):627-643. PubMed ID: 31231981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. The impact of misinformation presented during jury deliberation on juror memory and decision-making.
    Cullen HJ; Dilevski N; Nitschke FT; Ribeiro G; Brind S; Woolley N
    Front Psychol; 2024; 15():1232228. PubMed ID: 38344276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Experimental research on jury decision-making.
    Maccoun RJ
    Science; 1989 Jun; 244(4908):1046-50. PubMed ID: 17741042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. On racial diversity and group decision making: identifying multiple effects of racial composition on jury deliberations.
    Sommers SR
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2006 Apr; 90(4):597-612. PubMed ID: 16649857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Student progress decision-making in programmatic assessment: can we extrapolate from clinical decision-making and jury decision-making?
    Tweed M; Wilkinson T
    BMC Med Educ; 2019 May; 19(1):176. PubMed ID: 31146714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Citizens' juries in planning research priorities: process, engagement and outcome.
    Gooberman-Hill R; Horwood J; Calnan M
    Health Expect; 2008 Sep; 11(3):272-81. PubMed ID: 18816323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluating the comprehensibility of jury instructions: a method and an example.
    Rose VG; Ogloff JR
    Law Hum Behav; 2001 Aug; 25(4):409-31. PubMed ID: 11501441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.