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 *

194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21308752)

  • 1. How reason for surgery and patient weight affect verdicts and perceptions in medical malpractice trials: a comparison of students and jurors.
    Reichert J; Miller MK; Bornstein BH; Shelton HD
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):395-418. PubMed ID: 21308752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Town vs. gown: a direct comparison of community residents and student mock jurors.
    Hosch HM; Culhane SE; Tubb VA; Granillo EA
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):452-66. PubMed ID: 21351133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. What are we studying? Student jurors, community jurors, and construct validity.
    Keller SR; Wiener RL
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):376-94. PubMed ID: 21766327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Gender, Generations, and Guilt: Defendant Gender and Age Affect Jurors' Decisions and Perceptions in an Intimate Partner Homicide Trial.
    Ruva CL; Smith KD; Sykes EC
    J Interpers Violence; 2023 Dec; 38(23-24):12089-12112. PubMed ID: 37602736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparison of students' and jury panelists' decision-making in split recovery cases.
    Fox P; Wingrove T; Pfeifer C
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):358-75. PubMed ID: 21308751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Perceptions of domestic violence and mock jurors' sentencing decisions.
    Kern R; Libkuman TM; Temple SL
    J Interpers Violence; 2007 Dec; 22(12):1515-35. PubMed ID: 17993639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of mood and emotion on juror processing and judgments.
    Semmler C; Brewer N
    Behav Sci Law; 2002; 20(4):423-36. PubMed ID: 12210977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. The effect of acknowledging mock jurors' feelings on affective and cognitive biases: it depends on the sample.
    McCabe JG; Krauss DA
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):331-57. PubMed ID: 21766326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Making attributions to the physician following closing arguments of a simulated medical malpractice suit: jurors' sex, health locus of control, and locus of authority.
    Worthington DL
    Psychol Rep; 1997 Jun; 80(3 Pt 1):943-6. PubMed ID: 9198397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Estimating juror accuracy, juror ability, and the relationship between them.
    Park K
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Aug; 35(4):288-305. PubMed ID: 20658261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Juveniles tried as adults: the age of the juvenile matters.
    Semple JK; Woody WD
    Psychol Rep; 2011 Aug; 109(1):301-8. PubMed ID: 22049670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The influence of a defendant's body weight on perceptions of guilt.
    Schvey NA; Puhl RM; Levandoski KA; Brownell KD
    Int J Obes (Lond); 2013 Sep; 37(9):1275-81. PubMed ID: 23295503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.