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 *

177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27037161)

  • 41. Effects of false-evidence ploys and expert testimony on jurors' verdicts, recommended sentences, and perceptions of confession evidence.
    Woody WD; Forrest KD
    Behav Sci Law; 2009; 27(3):333-60. PubMed ID: 19405020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. What do we know about eyewitness identification?
    Wells GL
    Am Psychol; 1993 May; 48(5):553-71; discussion 572-80. PubMed ID: 8507052
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. I spy with my little eye: jurors' detection of internal validity threats in expert evidence.
    McAuliff BD; Duckworth TD
    Law Hum Behav; 2010 Dec; 34(6):489-500. PubMed ID: 20162342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Battered women who kill: the impact of expert testimony and empathy induction in the courtroom.
    Plumm KM; Terrance CA
    Violence Against Women; 2009 Feb; 15(2):186-205. PubMed ID: 19126834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. 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]  

  • 46. Juror sensitivity to false confession risk factors: Dispositional vs. situational attributions for a confession.
    Woestehoff SA; Meissner CA
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Oct; 40(5):564-79. PubMed ID: 27227274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Witnessing-condition information differentially affects evaluations of high- and moderate-confidence eyewitness identifications.
    Lebensfeld TC; Smalarz L
    Cognition; 2024 Sep; 250():105841. PubMed ID: 38852371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. 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]  

  • 49. Evaluating witness testimony: Juror knowledge, false memory, and the utility of evidence-based directions.
    Helm RK
    Int J Evid Proof; 2021 Oct; 25(4):264-285. PubMed ID: 34658655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Evaluating competency to stand trial with evidence-based practice.
    Rogers R; Johansson-Love J
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2009; 37(4):450-60. PubMed ID: 20018994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Mock juror sensitivity to forensic evidence in drug facilitated sexual assaults.
    Schuller RA; Ryan A; Krauss D; Jenkins G
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2013; 36(2):121-8. PubMed ID: 23433947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Protecting eyewitness evidence: examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool.
    Gabbert F; Hope L; Fisher RP
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Aug; 33(4):298-307. PubMed ID: 18561007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Eyewitness memory is reliable, but the criminal justice system is not.
    Wixted JT; Mickes L
    Memory; 2022 Jan; 30(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 35311489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Juror perceptions of child eyewitness testimony in a sexual abuse trial.
    Holcomb MJ; Jacquin KM
    J Child Sex Abus; 2007; 16(2):79-95. PubMed ID: 17895233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Showtime's
    Espi Forcen F; Rosenbaum KB; Friedman SH
    Australas Psychiatry; 2020 Aug; 28(4):431-432. PubMed ID: 32019357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. How effective are the cross-examination and expert testimony safeguards? Jurors' perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures.
    Devenport JL; Stinson V; Cutler BL; Kravitz DA
    J Appl Psychol; 2002 Dec; 87(6):1042-54. PubMed ID: 12558212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. An examination of the causes and solutions to eyewitness error.
    Wise RA; Sartori G; Magnussen S; Safer MA
    Front Psychiatry; 2014; 5():102. PubMed ID: 25165459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. One Country, Two Cultures: Are Hong Kong Mock Jurors "Mainlandized" by the Predominant Chinese Criminal Justice Concept of Confession?
    Hui CY; Lo TW
    Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2015 Sep; 59(10):1104-24. PubMed ID: 24670371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Thin slice expert testimony and mock trial deliberations.
    Parrott CT; Brodsky SL; Wilson JK
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2015; 42-43():67-74. PubMed ID: 26346686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. The psychiatrist-witness and legal guilt.
    Bursten B
    Am J Psychiatry; 1982 Jun; 139(6):784-8. PubMed ID: 7081492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.