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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20411316)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. How jurors use and misuse character evidence.
    Hunt JS; Budesheim TL
    J Appl Psychol; 2004 Apr; 89(2):347-61. PubMed ID: 15065980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Children as alibi witnesses: the effect of age and confidence on mock-juror decision making.
    Fawcett H; Winstanley K
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2018; 25(6):957-971. PubMed ID: 31984060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Hearsay versus children's testimony: Effects of truthful and deceptive statements on jurors' decisions.
    Goodman GS; Myers JE; Qin J; Quas JA; Castelli P; Redlich AD; Rogers L
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Jun; 30(3):363-401. PubMed ID: 16779675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Altruistic Lying in an Alibi Corroboration Context: The Effects of Liking, Compliance, and Relationship between Suspects and Witnesses.
    Marion SB; Burke TM
    Behav Sci Law; 2017 Jan; 35(1):37-59. PubMed ID: 28008653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and eyewitness confidence on mock-juror judgments.
    Brewer N; Burke A
    Law Hum Behav; 2002 Jun; 26(3):353-64. PubMed ID: 12061623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The influence of accounts and remorse on mock jurors' judgments of offenders.
    Jehle A; Miller MK; Kemmelmeier M
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Oct; 33(5):393-404. PubMed ID: 19082696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Jurors' perceptions of juvenile defendants: the influence of intellectual disability, abuse history, and confession evidence.
    Najdowski CJ; Bottoms BL; Vargas MC
    Behav Sci Law; 2009; 27(3):401-30. PubMed ID: 19391102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Perceptions of bias and credibility of male and female clinical psychologist and psychiatrist expert witnesses presenting clinical information in the courtroom.
    Kipoulas E; Edwards I; Radakovic R; Beazley PI
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2024; 96():102016. PubMed ID: 39213688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Investigator Sensitivity to Alibi Witness Inconsistency after a Long Delay.
    Price HL; Dahl LC
    Behav Sci Law; 2017 Jan; 35(1):60-74. PubMed ID: 28233336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. How type of excuse defense, mock juror age, and defendant age affect mock jurors' decisions.
    Higgins PL; Heath WP; Grannemann BD
    J Soc Psychol; 2007 Aug; 147(4):371-92. PubMed ID: 17955749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Jurors' perceptions of forensic science expert witnesses: Experience, qualifications, testimony style and credibility.
    McCarthy Wilcox A; NicDaeid N
    Forensic Sci Int; 2018 Oct; 291():100-108. PubMed ID: 30216840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. "With a little help from my friends...": the role of co-witness relationship in susceptibility to misinformation.
    Hope L; Ost J; Gabbert F; Healey S; Lenton E
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2008 Feb; 127(2):476-84. PubMed ID: 17937922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Race, witness credibility, and jury deliberation in a simulated drug trafficking trial.
    Shaw EV; Lynch M; Laguna S; Frenda SJ
    Law Hum Behav; 2021 Jun; 45(3):215-228. PubMed ID: 34351204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Relations among mock jurors' attitudes, trial evidence, and their selections of an insanity defense verdict: a path analytic approach.
    Poulson RL; Brondino MJ; Brown H; Braithwaite RL
    Psychol Rep; 1998 Feb; 82(1):3-16. PubMed ID: 9520530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.