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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29676480)

  • 1. Medication state at the time of the offense: Medication noncompliance, insight and criminal responsibility.
    Parrott CT; Jones MA; Brodsky SL; Shealy C
    Behav Sci Law; 2018 May; 36(3):339-357. PubMed ID: 29676480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Determining criminal responsibility: How relevant are insight and personal attitudes to mock jurors?
    Jung S
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2015; 42-43():37-42. PubMed ID: 26294081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Identifying factors associated with criminal responsibility by analyzing court trial verdicts.
    Shiina A; Sato A; Iyo M; Igarashi Y
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2021; 77():101702. PubMed ID: 33962349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Relations among mock jurors' attitudes, trial evidence, and their selections of an insanity defense verdict: a path analytic approach.
    Poulson RL; Brondino MJ; Brown H; Braithwaite RL
    Psychol Rep; 1998 Feb; 82(1):3-16. PubMed ID: 9520530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Mock jurors' evaluation of firearm examiner testimony.
    Garrett BL; Scurich N; Crozier WE
    Law Hum Behav; 2020 Oct; 44(5):412-423. PubMed ID: 33090867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Attorney Questions Predict Jury-eligible Adult Assessments of Attorneys, Child Witnesses, and Defendant Guilt.
    Mugno AP; Klemfuss JZ; Lyon TD
    Behav Sci Law; 2016 Jan; 34(1):178-99. PubMed ID: 26932420
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Proposition: a personality disorder may nullify responsibility for a criminal act.
    Kinscherff R
    J Law Med Ethics; 2010; 38(4):745-59. PubMed ID: 21105938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Mock Juror Perceptions of Credibility and Culpability in an Autistic Defendant.
    Maras K; Marshall I; Sands C
    J Autism Dev Disord; 2019 Mar; 49(3):996-1010. PubMed ID: 30382444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Face-to-face confrontation: effects of closed-circuit technology on children's eyewitness testimony and jurors' decisions.
    Goodman GS; Tobey AE; Batterman-Faunce JM; Orcutt H; Thomas S; Shapiro C; Sachsenmaier T
    Law Hum Behav; 1998 Apr; 22(2):165-203. PubMed ID: 9566121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Educating Jurors about Forensic Evidence: Using an Expert Witness and Judicial Instructions to Mitigate the Impact of Invalid Forensic Science Testimony.
    Eastwood J; Caldwell J
    J Forensic Sci; 2015 Nov; 60(6):1523-8. PubMed ID: 26234166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Impact of Evidence Type and Judicial Warning on Juror Perceptions of Global and Specific Witness Evidence.
    Wheatcroft JM; Keogan H
    J Psychol; 2017 Apr; 151(3):247-267. PubMed ID: 27982750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of criminal defendant's history of childhood sexual abuse and personality disorder diagnosis on juror decision making.
    Butler E; Jacquin K
    Personal Ment Health; 2014 Aug; 8(3):188-98. PubMed ID: 24753498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The bottom line: the effect of written expert witness statements on juror verdicts and information processing.
    ForsterLee L; Horowitz I; Athaide-Victor E; Brown N
    Law Hum Behav; 2000 Apr; 24(2):259-70. PubMed ID: 10810841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Neurologic disorder and criminal responsibility.
    Yaffe G
    Handb Clin Neurol; 2013; 118():345-56. PubMed ID: 24182391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. What are we studying? Student jurors, community jurors, and construct validity.
    Keller SR; Wiener RL
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):376-94. PubMed ID: 21766327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.