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 *

303 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21751243)

  • 1. The influence of FMRI lie detection evidence on juror decision-making.
    McCabe DP; Castel AD; Rhodes MG
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(4):566-77. PubMed ID: 21751243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 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. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Neuroimage evidence and the insanity defense.
    Schweitzer NJ; Saks MJ
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(4):592-607. PubMed ID: 21744379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Negative and positive pretrial publicity affect juror memory and decision making.
    Ruva CL; McEvoy C
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2008 Sep; 14(3):226-35. PubMed ID: 18808276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. The influence of sex on mock jurors' verdicts across type of child abuse cases.
    Pettalia J; Pozzulo JD; Reed J
    Child Abuse Negl; 2017 Jul; 69():1-9. PubMed ID: 28415027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Functional MRI lie detection: too good to be true?
    Simpson JR
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2008; 36(4):491-8. PubMed ID: 19092066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. New measures improve the accuracy of the directed-lie test when detecting deception using a mock crime.
    Bell BG; Kircher JC; Bernhardt PC
    Physiol Behav; 2008 Jun; 94(3):331-40. PubMed ID: 18343464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The impact of developmental language disorder in a defendant's description on mock jurors' perceptions and judgements.
    Hobson HM; Woodley J; Gamblen S; Brackely J; O'Neill F; Miles D; Westwood C
    Int J Lang Commun Disord; 2023 Jan; 58(1):189-205. PubMed ID: 36087284
    [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. Defendant remorse, need for affect, and juror sentencing decisions.
    Corwin EP; Cramer RJ; Griffin DA; Brodsky SL
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2012; 40(1):41-9. PubMed ID: 22396340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Towards clinical trials of lie detection with fMRI.
    Hakun JG; Ruparel K; Seelig D; Busch E; Loughead JW; Gur RC; Langleben DD
    Soc Neurosci; 2009; 4(6):518-27. PubMed ID: 18633835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. [The development and application of lie detection in forensic science].
    Wang L; Yang L; Ge Y; Cai JF; Chang YF; Lan LM
    Fa Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2008 Oct; 24(5):365-8. PubMed ID: 18979922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of neuroimaging evidence on mock juror decision making.
    Greene E; Cahill BS
    Behav Sci Law; 2012; 30(3):280-96. PubMed ID: 22213023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Chaos in the courtroom reconsidered: emotional bias and juror nullification.
    Horowitz IA; Kerr NL; Park ES; Gockel C
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Apr; 30(2):163-81. PubMed ID: 16786405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.