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 *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32320075)

  • 1. Error Rates, Likelihood Ratios, and Jury Evaluation of Forensic Evidence.
    Garrett BL; Crozier WE; Grady R
    J Forensic Sci; 2020 Jul; 65(4):1199-1209. PubMed ID: 32320075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. The impact of proficiency testing information and error aversions on the weight given to fingerprint evidence.
    Mitchell G; Garrett BL
    Behav Sci Law; 2019 Mar; 37(2):195-210. PubMed ID: 30883891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Jurors' perceptions of forensic science expert witnesses: Experience, qualifications, testimony style and credibility.
    McCarthy Wilcox A; NicDaeid N
    Forensic Sci Int; 2018 Oct; 291():100-108. PubMed ID: 30216840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Improving juror assessments of forensic testimony and its effects on decision-making and evidence evaluation.
    LaBat DE; Goldfarb D; Evans JR; Compo NS; Koolmees CJ; LaPorte G; Lothridge K
    Law Hum Behav; 2023 Oct; 47(5):566-578. PubMed ID: 37603005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Juror appraisals of forensic evidence: Effects of blind proficiency and cross-examination.
    Crozier WE; Kukucka J; Garrett BL
    Forensic Sci Int; 2020 Oct; 315():110433. PubMed ID: 32763747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Can expert testimony sensitize jurors to variations in confession evidence?
    Henderson KS; Levett LM
    Law Hum Behav; 2016 Dec; 40(6):638-649. PubMed ID: 27243361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Lay understanding of forensic statistics: Evaluation of random match probabilities, likelihood ratios, and verbal equivalents.
    Thompson WC; Newman EJ
    Law Hum Behav; 2015 Aug; 39(4):332-49. PubMed ID: 25984887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effect of confession evidence on jurors' verdict decisions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Mindthoff A; Ferreira PA; Meissner CA
    Law Hum Behav; 2024 Jun; 48(3):163-181. PubMed ID: 38949764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Expert testimony regarding child witnesses: does it sensitize jurors to forensic interview quality?
    Buck JA; London K; Wright DB
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Apr; 35(2):152-64. PubMed ID: 20443056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Science in the jury box: jurors' comprehension of mitochondrial DNA evidence.
    Hans VP; Kaye DH; Dann BM; Farley EJ; Albertson S
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Feb; 35(1):60-71. PubMed ID: 20461543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Deconstructing the simplification of jury instructions: How simplifying the features of complexity affects jurors' application of instructions.
    Baguley CM; McKimmie BM; Masser BM
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Jun; 41(3):284-304. PubMed ID: 28182459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Educating jurors about eyewitness testimony in criminal cases with circumstantial and forensic evidence.
    Safer MA; Murphy RP; Wise RA; Bussey L; Millett C; Holfeld B
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2016; 47():86-92. PubMed ID: 27037161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. The effectiveness of opposing expert witnesses for educating jurors about unreliable expert evidence.
    Levett LM; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2008 Aug; 32(4):363-74. PubMed ID: 17940854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Psychological aspects of courtroom testimony.
    Loftus EF
    Ann N Y Acad Sci; 1980; 347():27-37. PubMed ID: 6930909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.