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 *

247 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23406506)

  • 1. The accuracy of auditors' and layered voice Analysis (LVA) operators' judgments of truth and deception during police questioning.
    Horvath F; McCloughan J; Weatherman D; Slowik S
    J Forensic Sci; 2013 Mar; 58(2):385-92. PubMed ID: 23406506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Stress and deception in speech: evaluating layered voice analysis.
    Harnsberger JD; Hollien H; Martin CA; Hollien KA
    J Forensic Sci; 2009 May; 54(3):642-50. PubMed ID: 19432740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Strategic use of evidence during police interviews: when training to detect deception works.
    Hartwig M; Granhag PA; Strömwall LA; Kronkvist O
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Oct; 30(5):603-19. PubMed ID: 16977348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Using Named Entities for Computer-Automated Verbal Deception Detection.
    Kleinberg B; Mozes M; Arntz A; Verschuere B
    J Forensic Sci; 2018 May; 63(3):714-723. PubMed ID: 28940300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. How humans impair automated deception detection performance.
    Kleinberg B; Verschuere B
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2021 Feb; 213():103250. PubMed ID: 33450692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Heuristic versus systematic processing of information in detecting deception: questioning the truth bias.
    Masip J; Garrido E; Herrero C
    Psychol Rep; 2009 Aug; 105(1):11-36. PubMed ID: 19810430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The reliability of lie detection performance.
    Leach AM; Lindsay RC; Koehler R; Beaudry JL; Bala NC; Lee K; Talwar V
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Feb; 33(1):96-109. PubMed ID: 18594955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy of deception judgments.
    Bond CF; DePaulo BM
    Pers Soc Psychol Rev; 2006; 10(3):214-34. PubMed ID: 16859438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. "Intuitive" lie detection of children's deception by law enforcement officials and university students.
    Leach AM; Talwar V; Lee K; Bala N; Lindsay RC
    Law Hum Behav; 2004 Dec; 28(6):661-85. PubMed ID: 15732652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Cues to deception and ability to detect lies as a function of police interview styles.
    Vrij A; Mann S; Kristen S; Fisher RP
    Law Hum Behav; 2007 Oct; 31(5):499-518. PubMed ID: 17211691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Truth-tellers stand the test of time and contradict evidence less than liars, even months after a crime.
    Sukumar D; Wade KA; Hodgson JS
    Law Hum Behav; 2018 Apr; 42(2):145-155. PubMed ID: 29672094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The self in conflict: the role of executive processes during truthful and deceptive responses about attitudes.
    Johnson R; Henkell H; Simon E; Zhu J
    Neuroimage; 2008 Jan; 39(1):469-82. PubMed ID: 17919934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Experienced and novice officers' generalized communication suspicion and veracity judgments.
    Masip J; Alonso H; Herrero C; Garrido E
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Apr; 40(2):169-81. PubMed ID: 26844912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Is interactional dissynchrony a clue to deception? Insights from automated analysis of nonverbal visual cues.
    Yu X; Zhang S; Yan Z; Yang F; Huang J; Dunbar NE; Jensen ML; Burgoon JK; Metaxas DN
    IEEE Trans Cybern; 2015 Mar; 45(3):506-20. PubMed ID: 24988600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Why do lie-catchers fail? A lens model meta-analysis of human lie judgments.
    Hartwig M; Bond CF
    Psychol Bull; 2011 Jul; 137(4):643-59. PubMed ID: 21707129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Facial appearance and judgments of credibility: the effects of facial babyishness and age on statement credibility.
    Masip J; Garrido E; Herrero C
    Genet Soc Gen Psychol Monogr; 2003 Aug; 129(3):269-311. PubMed ID: 15134128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Detecting ulterior motives from verbal cues in group deliberations.
    Dunbar NE; Burgoon JK; Chen X; Wang X; Ge S; Huang Q; Nunamaker J
    Front Psychol; 2023; 14():1166225. PubMed ID: 37292506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Efficacy of forensic statement analysis in distinguishing truthful from deceptive eyewitness accounts of highly stressful events.
    Morgan CA; Colwell K; Hazlett GA
    J Forensic Sci; 2011 Sep; 56(5):1227-34. PubMed ID: 21854383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using reality monitoring to improve deception detection in the context of the cognitive interview for suspects.
    Logue M; Book AS; Frosina P; Huizinga T; Amos S
    Law Hum Behav; 2015 Aug; 39(4):360-7. PubMed ID: 25844516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effects of sketching while narrating on information elicitation and deception detection in multiple interviews.
    Deeb H; Vrij A; Leal S; Burkhardt J
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2021 Feb; 213():103236. PubMed ID: 33360343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.