211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31983986)
1. Crime Scene Familiarity: Does it Influence Mock Jurors' Decisions?
Pica E; Pozzulo J
Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2017; 24(5):745-759. PubMed ID: 31983986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. What Evidence Matters to Jurors? The Prevalence and Importance of Different Homicide Trial Evidence to Mock Jurors.
Schweitzer K; Nuñez N
Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2018; 25(3):437-451. PubMed ID: 31984031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Eyewitness confidence and mock juror decisions of guilt: A meta-analytic review.
Slane CR; Dodson CS
Law Hum Behav; 2022 Feb; 46(1):45-66. PubMed ID: 35073115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The influence of sex on mock jurors' verdicts across type of child abuse cases.
Pettalia J; Pozzulo JD; Reed J
Child Abuse Negl; 2017 Jul; 69():1-9. PubMed ID: 28415027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. How type of excuse defense, mock juror age, and defendant age affect mock jurors' decisions.
Higgins PL; Heath WP; Grannemann BD
J Soc Psychol; 2007 Aug; 147(4):371-92. PubMed ID: 17955749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. From the shadows into the light: How pretrial publicity and deliberation affect mock jurors' decisions, impressions, and memory.
Ruva CL; Guenther CC
Law Hum Behav; 2015 Jun; 39(3):294-310. PubMed ID: 25495716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and eyewitness confidence on mock-juror judgments.
Brewer N; Burke A
Law Hum Behav; 2002 Jun; 26(3):353-64. PubMed ID: 12061623
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Mock jurors' awareness of age-related changes in memory and cognitive capacity.
Martschuk N; Sporer SL
Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2020; 27(3):441-464. PubMed ID: 33071551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Mock Jurors' Perceptions of Sexual Assault on a University Campus.
Pica E; Sheahan CL; Pozzulo J
J Interpers Violence; 2021 May; 36(9-10):NP5447-NP5465. PubMed ID: 30239260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Gender, Generations, and Guilt: Defendant Gender and Age Affect Jurors' Decisions and Perceptions in an Intimate Partner Homicide Trial.
Ruva CL; Smith KD; Sykes EC
J Interpers Violence; 2023 Dec; 38(23-24):12089-12112. PubMed ID: 37602736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Mock-Jurors' Judgements in a Sexual Assault Case: The Influence of Defendant Race and Occupational Status, Delayed Reporting, and Multiple Allegations.
Fraser BM; Pica E; Pozzulo JD
J Interpers Violence; 2023 Jul; 38(13-14):7964-7989. PubMed ID: 36762531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Juror sensitivity to the cross-race effect.
Abshire J; Bornstein BH
Law Hum Behav; 2003 Oct; 27(5):471-80. PubMed ID: 14593793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. "But He's a Star Football Player!": How Social Status Influences Mock Jurors' Perceptions in a Sexual Assault Case.
Pica E; Sheahan C; Pozzulo J
J Interpers Violence; 2020 Oct; 35(19-20):3963-3985. PubMed ID: 29294785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. How effective are the cross-examination and expert testimony safeguards? Jurors' perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures.
Devenport JL; Stinson V; Cutler BL; Kravitz DA
J Appl Psychol; 2002 Dec; 87(6):1042-54. PubMed ID: 12558212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Can jurors be biased in their evaluation of third-party evidence within cases of rape?
Parsons A; Mojtahedi D
Int J Law Psychiatry; 2022; 85():101837. PubMed ID: 36122514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The influence of race on jurors' perceptions of lethal police use of force.
Ewanation L; Maeder EM
Law Hum Behav; 2023 Feb; 47(1):53-67. PubMed ID: 36931849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Hearsay versus children's testimony: Effects of truthful and deceptive statements on jurors' decisions.
Goodman GS; Myers JE; Qin J; Quas JA; Castelli P; Redlich AD; Rogers L
Law Hum Behav; 2006 Jun; 30(3):363-401. PubMed ID: 16779675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
