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 *

213 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24820149)

  • 1. The impact of multiple show-ups on eyewitness decision-making and innocence risk.
    Smith AM; Bertrand M; Lindsay RC; Kalmet N; Grossman D; Provenzano D
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2014 Sep; 20(3):247-59. PubMed ID: 24820149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A Bayesian analysis on the (dis)utility of iterative-showup procedures: The moderating impact of prior probabilities.
    Smith AM; Lindsay RC; Wells GL
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Oct; 40(5):503-16. PubMed ID: 27182619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Eyewitness identification evidence and innocence risk.
    Clark SE; Godfrey RD
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2009 Feb; 16(1):22-42. PubMed ID: 19145007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. On the presumption of evidentiary independence: can confessions corrupt eyewitness identifications?
    Hasel LE; Kassin SM
    Psychol Sci; 2009 Jan; 20(1):122-6. PubMed ID: 19152544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Unfair Lineups Make Witnesses More Likely to Confuse Innocent and Guilty Suspects.
    Colloff MF; Wade KA; Strange D
    Psychol Sci; 2016 Sep; 27(9):1227-39. PubMed ID: 27458070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Using machine learning analyses to explore relations between eyewitness lineup looking behaviors and suspect guilt.
    Price HL; Bruer KC; Adkins MC
    Law Hum Behav; 2020 Jun; 44(3):223-237. PubMed ID: 32105097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Estimating the proportion of guilty suspects and posterior probability of guilt in lineups using signal-detection models.
    Cohen AL; Starns JJ; Rotello CM; Cataldo AM
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2020 May; 5(1):21. PubMed ID: 32405927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Potential causes of racial disparities in wrongful convictions based on mistaken identifications: Own-race bias and differences in evidence-based suspicion.
    Katzman J; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2023 Feb; 47(1):23-35. PubMed ID: 36931847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The single lineup paradigm: A new way to manipulate target presence in eyewitness identification experiments.
    Oriet C; Fitzgerald RJ
    Law Hum Behav; 2018 Feb; 42(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 29461076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The impact of eyewitness identifications from simultaneous and sequential lineups.
    Wright DB
    Memory; 2007 Oct; 15(7):746-54. PubMed ID: 17852725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Double-blind photo lineups using actual eyewitnesses: an experimental test of a sequential versus simultaneous lineup procedure.
    Wells GL; Steblay NK; Dysart JE
    Law Hum Behav; 2015 Feb; 39(1):1-14. PubMed ID: 24933175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparing witness performance in the field versus the lab: How real-world conditions affect eyewitness decision-making.
    Eisen ML; Ying RC; Chui C; Swaby MA
    Law Hum Behav; 2022 Jun; 46(3):175-188. PubMed ID: 35604705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Eyewitness identification performance on showups improves with an additional-opportunities instruction: Evidence for present-absent criteria discrepancy.
    Smith AM; Wells GL; Lindsay RCL; Myerson T
    Law Hum Behav; 2018 Jun; 42(3):215-226. PubMed ID: 29620396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Investigating investigators: examining witnesses' influence on investigators.
    Dahl LC; Lindsay DS; Brimacombe CA
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Dec; 30(6):707-32. PubMed ID: 16741634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. New signal detection theory-based framework for eyewitness performance in lineups.
    Lee J; Penrod SD
    Law Hum Behav; 2019 Oct; 43(5):436-454. PubMed ID: 31368723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The reveal procedure: A way to enhance evidence of innocence from police lineups.
    Yilmaz AS; Lebensfeld TC; Wilson BM
    Law Hum Behav; 2022 Apr; 46(2):164-173. PubMed ID: 35084905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Investigating investigators: how presentation order influences participant-investigators' interpretations of eyewitness identification and alibi evidence.
    Dahl LC; Brimacombe CA; Lindsay DS
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Oct; 33(5):368-80. PubMed ID: 18810615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. On the diagnosticity of multiple-witness identifications.
    Clark SE; Wells GL
    Law Hum Behav; 2008 Oct; 32(5):406-22. PubMed ID: 18095147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Eyewitness accuracy rates in police showup and lineup presentations: a meta-analytic comparison.
    Steblay N; Dysart J; Fulero S; Lindsay RC
    Law Hum Behav; 2003 Oct; 27(5):523-40. PubMed ID: 14593796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Sequential lineup presentation promotes less-biased criterion setting but does not improve discriminability.
    Palmer MA; Brewer N
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Jun; 36(3):247-55. PubMed ID: 22667814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.