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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31045389)

  • 1. An expected cost model of eyewitness identification.
    Yang Y; Smalarz L; Moody SA; Cabell JJ; Copp CJ
    Law Hum Behav; 2019 Jun; 43(3):205-219. PubMed ID: 31045389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Potential causes of racial disparities in wrongful convictions based on mistaken identifications: Own-race bias and differences in evidence-based suspicion.
    Katzman J; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2023 Feb; 47(1):23-35. PubMed ID: 36931847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Eyewitness accuracy rates in police showup and lineup presentations: a meta-analytic comparison.
    Steblay N; Dysart J; Fulero S; Lindsay RC
    Law Hum Behav; 2003 Oct; 27(5):523-40. PubMed ID: 14593796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Four utilities in eyewitness identification practice: Dissociations between receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and expected utility analysis.
    Lampinen JM; Smith AM; Wells GL
    Law Hum Behav; 2019 Feb; 43(1):26-44. PubMed ID: 30382722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. A Bayesian analysis on the (dis)utility of iterative-showup procedures: The moderating impact of prior probabilities.
    Smith AM; Lindsay RC; Wells GL
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Oct; 40(5):503-16. PubMed ID: 27182619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Policy and procedure recommendations for the collection and preservation of eyewitness identification evidence.
    Wells GL; Kovera MB; Douglass AB; Brewer N; Meissner CA; Wixted JT
    Law Hum Behav; 2020 Feb; 44(1):3-36. PubMed ID: 32027160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The Relationship Between Eyewitness Confidence and Identification Accuracy: A New Synthesis.
    Wixted JT; Wells GL
    Psychol Sci Public Interest; 2017 May; 18(1):10-65. PubMed ID: 28395650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Does filler database size influence identification accuracy?
    Bergold AN; Heaton P
    Law Hum Behav; 2018 Jun; 42(3):227-243. PubMed ID: 29809026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Using objective measures to examine the effect of suspect-filler similarity on eyewitness identification performance.
    McKinley GL; Peterson DJ
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2022 Oct; 7(1):95. PubMed ID: 36271974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effect of lineup size on eyewitness identification.
    Akan M; Robinson MM; Mickes L; Wixted JT; Benjamin AS
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2021 Jun; 27(2):369-392. PubMed ID: 33271047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.