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 *

177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30687204)

  • 1. Detecting Lies via a Theme-Selection Strategy.
    Palena N; Caso L; Vrij A
    Front Psychol; 2018; 9():2775. PubMed ID: 30687204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cues to deception: can complications, common knowledge details, and self-handicapping strategies discriminate between truths, embedded lies and outright lies in an Italian-speaking sample?
    Caso L; Cavagnis L; Vrij A; Palena N
    Front Psychol; 2023; 14():1128194. PubMed ID: 37179853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Amplifying recall after delays via initial interviewing: Inoculating truth-tellers' memory as a function of encoding quality.
    Harvey AC; Vrij A; Leal S; Deeb H; Hope L; Mann S
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2020 Sep; 209():103130. PubMed ID: 32683098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Amplifying deceivers' flawed metacognition: Encouraging disclosures after delays with a model statement.
    Harvey AC; Vrij A; Leal S; Hope L; Mann S
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2019 Sep; 200():102935. PubMed ID: 31715443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Truth-tellers stand the test of time and contradict evidence less than liars, even months after a crime.
    Sukumar D; Wade KA; Hodgson JS
    Law Hum Behav; 2018 Apr; 42(2):145-155. PubMed ID: 29672094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Strategic Interviewing to Detect Deception: Cues to Deception across Repeated Interviews.
    Masip J; Blandón-Gitlin I; Martínez C; Herrero C; Ibabe I
    Front Psychol; 2016; 7():1702. PubMed ID: 27847493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Assessing the efficacy of baselining in deception detection: A comparative analysis of the reality interview and structured interview.
    Bogaard G; van de Bovekamp AM; Colwell K
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2024 Feb; 242():104112. PubMed ID: 38070326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Different physiological reactions when observing lies versus truths: Initial evidence and an intervention to enhance accuracy.
    Ten Brinke L; Lee JJ; Carney DR
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2019 Sep; 117(3):560-578. PubMed ID: 30869984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Been there before? Examining "familiarity" as a moderator for discriminating between true and false intentions.
    Knieps M; Granhag PA; Vrij A
    Front Psychol; 2014; 5():677. PubMed ID: 25071648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A stability bias effect among deceivers.
    Harvey AC; Vrij A; Hope L; Leal S; Mann S
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Dec; 41(6):519-529. PubMed ID: 28726439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Insurance based lie detection: Enhancing the verifiability approach with a model statement component.
    Harvey AC; Vrij A; Leal S; Lafferty M; Nahari G
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2017 Mar; 174():1-8. PubMed ID: 28088655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Detecting true and false opinions: The Devil's Advocate approach as a lie detection aid.
    Leal S; Vrij A; Mann S; Fisher RP
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2010 Jul; 134(3):323-9. PubMed ID: 20398882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 'Please tell me all you remember': a comparison between British and Arab interviewees' free narrative performance and its implications for lie detection.
    Vrij A; Leal S; Mann S; Vernham Z; Dalton G; Serok-Jeppa O; Rozmann N; Nahari G; Fisher RP
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2021; 28(4):546-559. PubMed ID: 35558151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. How deception and believability feedback affect recall.
    Vo TVA; Gunderson CA; Ten Brinke L
    Memory; 2022 Jul; 30(6):706-714. PubMed ID: 33557706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A reverse order interview does not aid deception detection regarding intentions.
    Fenn E; McGuire M; Langben S; Blandón-Gitlin I
    Front Psychol; 2015; 6():1298. PubMed ID: 26379610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. An empirical test of the behaviour analysis interview.
    Vrij A; Mann S; Fisher RP
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Jun; 30(3):329-45. PubMed ID: 16718581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An empirical test of the decision to lie component of the Activation-Decision-Construction-Action Theory (ADCAT).
    Masip J; Blandón-Gitlin I; de la Riva C; Herrero C
    Acta Psychol (Amst); 2016 Sep; 169():45-55. PubMed ID: 27219533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. T-Pattern Analysis and Cognitive Load Manipulation to Detect Low-Stake Lies: An Exploratory Study.
    Diana B; Zurloni V; Elia M; Cavalera C; Realdon O; Jonsson GK; Anguera MT
    Front Psychol; 2018; 9():257. PubMed ID: 29551986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Learning to Detect Deception from Evasive Answers and Inconsistencies across Repeated Interviews: A Study with Lay Respondents and Police Officers.
    Masip J; Martínez C; Blandón-Gitlin I; Sánchez N; Herrero C; Ibabe I
    Front Psychol; 2017; 8():2207. PubMed ID: 29354078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Statements about true and false intentions: using the Cognitive Interview to magnify the differences.
    Sooniste T; Granhag PA; Strömwall LA; Vrij A
    Scand J Psychol; 2015 Aug; 56(4):371-8. PubMed ID: 25929812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.