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: 25613035)

  • 1. Jurors report that risk measure scores matter in sexually violent predator trials, but that other factors matter more.
    Turner DB; Boccaccini MT; Murrie DC; Harris PB
    Behav Sci Law; 2015 Feb; 33(1):56-73. PubMed ID: 25613035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. How likely is "likely to reoffend" in sex offender civil commitment trials?
    Knighton JC; Murrie DC; Boccaccini MT; Turner DB
    Law Hum Behav; 2014 Jun; 38(3):293-304. PubMed ID: 24885113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Jurors' views on the value and objectivity of mental health experts testifying in sexually violent predator trials.
    Boccaccini MT; Murrie DC; Turner DB
    Behav Sci Law; 2014; 32(4):483-95. PubMed ID: 25043830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The biasing effect of the "sexually violent predator" label on legal decisions.
    Scurich N; Gongola J; Krauss DA
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2016; 47():109-14. PubMed ID: 27206709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Expert testimony in sexually violent predator commitments: conceptualizing legal standards of "mental disorder" and "likely to reoffend".
    Sreenivasan S; Weinberger LE; Garrick T
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2003; 31(4):471-85. PubMed ID: 14974803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Risk communication in sexually violent predator hearings.
    Scott S; Gilcrist B; Thurston N; Huss MT
    Behav Sci Law; 2010; 28(3):322-36. PubMed ID: 19908210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A practical guide for the evaluation of sexual recidivism risk in mentally retarded sex offenders.
    Phenix A; Sreenivasan S
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2009; 37(4):509-24. PubMed ID: 20018999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Juror decision-making in a mock sexually violent predator trial: gender differences in the impact of divergent types of expert testimony.
    Guy LS; Edens JF
    Behav Sci Law; 2003; 21(2):215-37. PubMed ID: 12645046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Use of DSM paraphilia diagnoses in sexually violent predator commitment cases.
    First MB; Halon RL
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2008; 36(4):443-54. PubMed ID: 19092060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The role and reliability of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised in U.S. sexually violent predator evaluations: a case law survey.
    DeMatteo D; Edens JF; Galloway M; Cox J; Smith ST; Formon D
    Law Hum Behav; 2014 Jun; 38(3):248-55. PubMed ID: 24127888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Risk assessment communication difficulties: An empirical examination of the effects of categorical versus probabilistic risk communication in sexually violent predator decisions.
    Krauss DA; Cook GI; Klapatch L
    Behav Sci Law; 2018 Sep; 36(5):532-553. PubMed ID: 30294807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Determining dangerousness in sexually violent predator evaluations: cognitive-experiential self-theory and juror judgments of expert testimony.
    Lieberman JD; Krauss DA; Kyger M; Lehoux M
    Behav Sci Law; 2007; 25(4):507-26. PubMed ID: 17620274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Gender differences in attitudes toward psychopathic sexual offenders.
    Guy LS; Edens JF
    Behav Sci Law; 2006; 24(1):65-85. PubMed ID: 16491475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Personality Assessment Inventory scores as predictors of misconduct among sex offenders civilly committed as sexually violent predators.
    Boccaccini MT; Rufino KA; Jackson RL; Murrie DC
    Psychol Assess; 2013 Dec; 25(4):1390-5. PubMed ID: 23937533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Predicting recidivism with the Personality Assessment Inventory in a sample of sex offenders screened for civil commitment as sexually violent predators.
    Boccaccini MT; Murrie DC; Hawes SW; Simpler A; Johnson J
    Psychol Assess; 2010 Mar; 22(1):142-8. PubMed ID: 20230160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. When experts disagreed, who was correct? A comparison of PCL-R scores from independent raters and opposing forensic experts.
    Rufino KA; Boccaccini MT; Hawes SW; Murrie DC
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Dec; 36(6):527-37. PubMed ID: 22353047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Examining the scope of questionable diagnostic reliability in Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) evaluations.
    Perillo AD; Spada AH; Calkins C; Jeglic EL
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2014; 37(2):190-7. PubMed ID: 24274914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparing recidivism rates of treatment responders/nonresponders in a sample of 413 child molesters who had completed community-based sex offender treatment in the United kingdom.
    Beech AR; Mandeville-Norden R; Goodwill A
    Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2012 Feb; 56(1):29-49. PubMed ID: 21187301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Diagnosing and litigating hebephilia in sexually violent predator civil commitment proceedings.
    Fabian JM
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2011; 39(4):496-505. PubMed ID: 22159977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reliability of risk assessment measures used in sexually violent predator proceedings.
    Miller CS; Kimonis ER; Otto RK; Kline SM; Wasserman AL
    Psychol Assess; 2012 Dec; 24(4):944-53. PubMed ID: 22563984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.