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 *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30657761)

  • 1. Reconciling the opposing effects of neurobiological evidence on criminal sentencing judgments.
    Allen CH; Vold K; Felsen G; Blumenthal-Barby JS; Aharoni E
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(1):e0210584. PubMed ID: 30657761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Juror Decision-making in Death Penalty Sentencing when Presented with Defendant's History of Child Abuse or Neglect.
    Bell Holleran LL; Vaughan TJ; Vandiver DM
    Behav Sci Law; 2016 Nov; 34(6):742-766. PubMed ID: 28098410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The Influence of Biomedical Information and Childhood History on Sentencing.
    Kim J; Boytos A; Seong Y; Park K
    Behav Sci Law; 2015; 33(6):815-26. PubMed ID: 26311175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Impact of behavioral genetic evidence on the adjudication of criminal behavior.
    Appelbaum PS; Scurich N
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2014; 42(1):91-100. PubMed ID: 24618524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The double-edged sword: does biomechanism increase or decrease judges' sentencing of psychopaths?
    Aspinwall LG; Brown TR; Tabery J
    Science; 2012 Aug; 337(6096):846-9. PubMed ID: 22904010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of Mental Health and Neuroscience Evidence on Juror Perceptions of a Criminal Defendant: the Moderating Role of Political Orientation.
    Mowle EN; Edens JF; Clark JW; Sörman K
    Behav Sci Law; 2016 Nov; 34(6):726-741. PubMed ID: 27620269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The double-edged sword of genetic accounts of criminality: causal attributions from genetic ascriptions affect legal decision making.
    Cheung BY; Heine SJ
    Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2015 Dec; 41(12):1723-38. PubMed ID: 26498975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A jury of scientists: Formal education in biobehavioral sciences reduces the odds of punitive criminal sentencing.
    Thomaidou MA; Berryessa CM
    Behav Sci Law; 2022 Nov; 40(6):787-817. PubMed ID: 35978472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. PATHOLOGICAL STATES AND CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY.
    WILSON DL
    Can Med Assoc J; 1965 Sep; 93(10):541-5. PubMed ID: 14341653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Nature, nurture, and capital punishment: How evidence of a genetic-environment interaction, future dangerousness, and deliberation affect sentencing decisions.
    Gordon N; Greene E
    Behav Sci Law; 2018 Jan; 36(1):65-83. PubMed ID: 28881042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Issues pertaining to expert evidence and the reasoning about punishment in a neuroscience-based sentencing appeal.
    McCay A; Ryan CJ
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2019; 65():101409. PubMed ID: 30591221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effects of a defendant's childhood physical abuse on lay support for sentencing: The moderating role of essentialism.
    Xie SS; Berryessa CM
    Behav Sci Law; 2024 Jul; ():. PubMed ID: 38977839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Justice at any cost? The impact of cost-benefit salience on criminal punishment judgments.
    Aharoni E; Kleider-Offutt HM; Brosnan SF; Watzek J
    Behav Sci Law; 2019 Jan; 37(1):38-60. PubMed ID: 30474239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Facial Trustworthiness and Criminal Sentencing: A Comment on Wilson and Rule (2015).
    Kramer RSS; Gardner EM
    Psychol Rep; 2020 Oct; 123(5):1854-1868. PubMed ID: 31757186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effect of neuroscientific evidence on sentencing depends on how one conceives of reasons for incarceration.
    Perricone A; Baskin-Sommers A; Ahn WK
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(11):e0276237. PubMed ID: 36322534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Facial Trustworthiness Predicts Extreme Criminal-Sentencing Outcomes.
    Wilson JP; Rule NO
    Psychol Sci; 2015 Aug; 26(8):1325-31. PubMed ID: 26162847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mentally disordered non-psychotic criminal offenders--treatment instead of punishment.
    Gottlieb P; Gabrielsen G; Kørner A; Stølan LO
    Nord J Psychiatry; 2013 Dec; 67(6):400-6. PubMed ID: 23293899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The psychopathic "label" and effects on punishment outcomes: A meta-analysis.
    Berryessa CM; Wohlstetter B
    Law Hum Behav; 2019 Feb; 43(1):9-25. PubMed ID: 30570278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Criminal defendants who desire punishment.
    Appelbaum KL
    Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1990; 18(4):385-91. PubMed ID: 2289028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.