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 *

210 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29265857)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Administrator blindness affects the recording of eyewitness lineup outcomes.
    Rodriguez DN; Berry MA
    Law Hum Behav; 2020 Feb; 44(1):71-87. PubMed ID: 31535891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Blind sequential lineup administration reduces both false identifications and confidence in those false identifications.
    Charman SD; Quiroz V
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Oct; 40(5):477-87. PubMed ID: 27227276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Measuring lineup fairness from eyewitness identification data using a multinomial processing tree model.
    Menne NM; Winter K; Bell R; Buchner A
    Sci Rep; 2023 Apr; 13(1):6290. PubMed ID: 37072473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Instruction bias and lineup presentation moderate the effects of administrator knowledge on eyewitness identification.
    Greathouse SM; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Feb; 33(1):70-82. PubMed ID: 18594956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Phenotypic mismatch between suspects and fillers but not phenotypic bias increases eyewitness identifications of Black suspects.
    Jones JM; Katzman J; Kovera MB
    Front Psychol; 2024; 15():1233782. PubMed ID: 38680285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Estimation of eyewitness error rates in fair and biased lineups.
    Fitzgerald RJ; Tredoux CG; Juncu S
    Law Hum Behav; 2023 Aug; 47(4):463-483. PubMed ID: 37471013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Lineup administrator influences on eyewitness identification decisions.
    Clark SE; Marshall TE; Rosenthal R
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2009 Mar; 15(1):63-75. PubMed ID: 19309217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Why are lineups better than showups? A test of the filler siphoning and enhanced discriminability accounts.
    Colloff MF; Wixted JT
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2020 Mar; 26(1):124-143. PubMed ID: 30883151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. What we know now: the Evanston Illinois field lineups.
    Steblay NK
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Feb; 35(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 20177754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Do masked-face lineups facilitate eyewitness identification of a masked individual?
    Manley KD; Chan JCK; Wells GL
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2019 Sep; 25(3):396-409. PubMed ID: 30556719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Suspect filler similarity in eyewitness lineups: a literature review and a novel methodology.
    Fitzgerald RJ; Oriet C; Price HL
    Law Hum Behav; 2015 Feb; 39(1):62-74. PubMed ID: 24955851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Can Lineup Administrators Blind to the Suspect's Identity Influence Witnesses' Decisions?
    McCallum NA; Brewer N
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2018; 25(1):93-105. PubMed ID: 31984009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.