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 *

258 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28504536)

  • 21. A perceptual scaling approach to eyewitness identification.
    Gepshtein S; Wang Y; He F; Diep D; Albright TD
    Nat Commun; 2020 Jul; 11(1):3380. PubMed ID: 32665586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Backloading in the sequential lineup prevents within-lineup criterion shifts that undermine eyewitness identification performance.
    Horry R; Palmer MA; Brewer N
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2012 Dec; 18(4):346-60. PubMed ID: 22924858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Optimizing the selection of fillers in police lineups.
    Colloff MF; Wilson BM; Seale-Carlisle TM; Wixted JT
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2021 Feb; 118(8):. PubMed ID: 33593908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Lineup composition, suspect position, and the sequential lineup advantage.
    Carlson CA; Gronlund SD; Clark SE
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2008 Jun; 14(2):118-128. PubMed ID: 18590368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Memory strength and lineup presentation moderate effects of administrator influence on mistaken identifications.
    Zimmerman DM; Chorn JA; Rhead LM; Evelo AJ; Kovera MB
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2017 Dec; 23(4):460-473. PubMed ID: 29265857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Police lineups of the future?
    Brewer N; Weber N; Guerin N
    Am Psychol; 2020 Jan; 75(1):76-91. PubMed ID: 30998024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Predictors of eyewitness identification decisions from video lineups in England: a field study.
    Horry R; Memon A; Wright DB; Milne R
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Aug; 36(4):257-65. PubMed ID: 22849411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Holistic Facial Composite Construction and Subsequent Lineup Identification Accuracy: Comparing Adults and Children.
    Davis JP; Thorniley S; Gibson S; Solomon C
    J Psychol; 2016; 150(1):102-18. PubMed ID: 25705795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Evaluating lineup fairness: Variations across methods and measures.
    Mansour JK; Beaudry JL; Kalmet N; Bertrand MI; Lindsay RC
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Feb; 41(1):103-115. PubMed ID: 27685644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Phenomenological reports diagnose accuracy of eyewitness identification decisions.
    Palmer MA; Brewer N; McKinnon AC; Weber N
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2010 Feb; 133(2):137-45. PubMed ID: 19954764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. Fair lineups are better than biased lineups and showups, but not because they increase underlying discriminability.
    Smith AM; Wells GL; Lindsay RC; Penrod SD
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Apr; 41(2):127-145. PubMed ID: 27685645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Modeling face similarity in police lineups.
    Shen KJ; Colloff MF; Vul E; Wilson BM; Wixted JT
    Psychol Rev; 2023 Mar; 130(2):432-461. PubMed ID: 36548056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A signal-detection-based diagnostic-feature-detection model of eyewitness identification.
    Wixted JT; Mickes L
    Psychol Rev; 2014 Apr; 121(2):262-76. PubMed ID: 24730600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The role of estimator variables in eyewitness identification.
    Semmler C; Dunn J; Mickes L; Wixted JT
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2018 Sep; 24(3):400-415. PubMed ID: 29389161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Age differences in lineup identification accuracy: people are better with their own age.
    Wright DB; Stroud JN
    Law Hum Behav; 2002 Dec; 26(6):641-54. PubMed ID: 12508699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of age-related changes in lineup performance.
    Humphries JE; Flowe HD
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2015 Apr; 132():189-204. PubMed ID: 25701225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.