139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27149289)
1. The interdependence of perceived confession voluntariness and case evidence.
Greenspan R; Scurich N
Law Hum Behav; 2016 Dec; 40(6):650-659. PubMed ID: 27149289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. An attribution theory-based content analysis of mock jurors' deliberations regarding coerced confessions.
Stevenson MC; McCracken E; Watson A; Petty T; Plogher T
Law Hum Behav; 2023 Apr; 47(2):348-366. PubMed ID: 37053386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The effect of confession evidence on jurors' verdict decisions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Mindthoff A; Ferreira PA; Meissner CA
Law Hum Behav; 2024 Jun; 48(3):163-181. PubMed ID: 38949764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Defendant stereotypicality moderates the effect of confession evidence on judgments of guilt.
Smalarz L; Madon S; Turosak A
Law Hum Behav; 2018 Aug; 42(4):355-368. PubMed ID: 29939062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Harmless error analysis: How do judges respond to confession errors?
Wallace DB; Kassin SM
Law Hum Behav; 2012 Apr; 36(2):151-7. PubMed ID: 22471419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Can expert testimony sensitize jurors to variations in confession evidence?
Henderson KS; Levett LM
Law Hum Behav; 2016 Dec; 40(6):638-649. PubMed ID: 27243361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Mock jurors' perceptions and case decisions following a juvenile interrogation: Investigating the roles of interested adults and confession type.
Mindthoff A; Malloy LC; Höhs JM
Law Hum Behav; 2020 Jun; 44(3):209-222. PubMed ID: 32496092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. How confession characteristics impact juror perceptions of evidence in criminal trials.
Shifton JJ
Behav Sci Law; 2019 Jan; 37(1):90-108. PubMed ID: 30706960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Will jurors correct for evidence interdependence in their verdicts? It depends.
Pate M; Kienzle M; Vogler V
Behav Sci Law; 2019 Jan; 37(1):78-89. PubMed ID: 30266044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An explanation for camera perspective bias in voluntariness judgment for video-recorded confession: Suggestion of cognitive frame.
Park K; Pyo J
Law Hum Behav; 2012 Jun; 36(3):184-94. PubMed ID: 22667808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Waiving goodbye to youth: Jurors perceive transferred juveniles differently from adults but render similar verdicts.
Katzman J; Fessinger MB; Bornstein BH; McWilliams K
Behav Sci Law; 2022 Nov; 40(6):835-858. PubMed ID: 36226574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Psychology of Confessions: A Review of the Literature and Issues.
Kassin SM; Gudjonsson GH
Psychol Sci Public Interest; 2004 Nov; 5(2):33-67. PubMed ID: 26158993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Videotaped interrogations and confessions: a simple change in camera perspective alters verdicts in simulated trials.
Lassiter GD; Geers AL; Handley IM; Weiland PE; Munhall PJ
J Appl Psychol; 2002 Oct; 87(5):867-74. PubMed ID: 12395811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Secondary confessions: the influence (or lack thereof) of incentive size and scientific expert testimony on jurors' perceptions of informant testimony.
Maeder EM; Pica E
Law Hum Behav; 2014 Dec; 38(6):560-8. PubMed ID: 25180762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The interrogation decision-making model: A general theoretical framework for confessions.
Yang Y; Guyll M; Madon S
Law Hum Behav; 2017 Feb; 41(1):80-92. PubMed ID: 27762573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Research-Based Instructions Induce Sensitivity to Confession Evidence.
Jones AM; Penrod S
Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2018; 25(2):257-272. PubMed ID: 31984019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
