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 *

154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33071546)

  • 1. Improving juror sensitivity to specific eyewitness factors: judicial instructions fail the test.
    Jones AM; Bergold AN; Penrod S
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2020; 27(3):366-385. PubMed ID: 33071546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. The impact of eyewitness expert evidence and judicial instruction on juror ability to evaluate eyewitness testimony.
    Martire KA; Kemp RI
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Jun; 33(3):225-36. PubMed ID: 18597165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Timing of eyewitness expert testimony, jurors' need for cognition, and case strength as determinants of trial verdicts.
    Leippe MR; Eisenstadt D; Rauch SM; Seib HM
    J Appl Psychol; 2004 Jun; 89(3):524-41. PubMed ID: 15161410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An examination of the causes and solutions to eyewitness error.
    Wise RA; Sartori G; Magnussen S; Safer MA
    Front Psychiatry; 2014; 5():102. PubMed ID: 25165459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. The Novel New Jersey Eyewitness Instruction Induces Skepticism but Not Sensitivity.
    Papailiou AP; Yokum DV; Robertson CT
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(12):e0142695. PubMed ID: 26650237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mock-juror evaluations of traditional and ratings-based eyewitness identification evidence.
    Sauer JD; Palmer MA; Brewer N
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Aug; 41(4):375-384. PubMed ID: 28191988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Research-Based Instructions Induce Sensitivity to Confession Evidence.
    Jones AM; Penrod S
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2018; 25(2):257-272. PubMed ID: 31984019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Viewing videotaped identification procedure increases juror sensitivity to single-blind photo-array administration.
    Modjadidi K; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2018 Jun; 42(3):244-257. PubMed ID: 29809027
    [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. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Impact of defense-only and opposing eyewitness experts on juror judgments.
    Devenport JL; Cutler BL
    Law Hum Behav; 2004 Oct; 28(5):569-76. PubMed ID: 15638210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Can the effectiveness of eyewitness expert testimony be improved?
    Wise RA; Kehn A
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2020; 27(2):315-330. PubMed ID: 32944129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Ordered questions bias eyewitnesses and jurors.
    Michael RB; Garry M
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2016 Apr; 23(2):601-8. PubMed ID: 26335413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.