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 *

139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35084906)

  • 1. The impact of pretrial publicity on mock juror and jury verdicts: A meta-analysis.
    Hoetger LA; Devine DJ; Brank EM; Drew RM; Rees R
    Law Hum Behav; 2022 Apr; 46(2):121-139. PubMed ID: 35084906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Understanding pretrial publicity: predecisional distortion of evidence by mock jurors.
    Hope L; Memon A; McGeorge P
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2004 Jun; 10(2):111-9. PubMed ID: 15222805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Negative and positive pretrial publicity affect juror memory and decision making.
    Ruva CL; McEvoy C
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2008 Sep; 14(3):226-35. PubMed ID: 18808276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Mock juror sampling issues in jury simulation research: A meta-analysis.
    Bornstein BH; Golding JM; Neuschatz J; Kimbrough C; Reed K; Magyarics C; Luecht K
    Law Hum Behav; 2017 Feb; 41(1):13-28. PubMed ID: 27762572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. An attribution theory-based content analysis of mock jurors' deliberations regarding coerced confessions.
    Stevenson MC; McCracken E; Watson A; Petty T; Plogher T
    Law Hum Behav; 2023 Apr; 47(2):348-366. PubMed ID: 37053386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Race, witness credibility, and jury deliberation in a simulated drug trafficking trial.
    Shaw EV; Lynch M; Laguna S; Frenda SJ
    Law Hum Behav; 2021 Jun; 45(3):215-228. PubMed ID: 34351204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Jurors' cognitive depletion and performance during jury deliberation as a function of jury diversity and defendant race.
    Peter-Hagene L
    Law Hum Behav; 2019 Jun; 43(3):232-249. PubMed ID: 31120276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of pretrial publicity on male and female jurors and judges in a mock rape trial.
    Riedel RG
    Psychol Rep; 1993 Dec; 73(3 Pt 1):819-32. PubMed ID: 8302986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. The Effect of Delayed Reporting on Mock-Juror Decision-Making in the Era of #MeToo.
    Fraser BM; Pica E; Pozzulo JD
    J Interpers Violence; 2022 Jul; 37(13-14):NP11791-NP11810. PubMed ID: 33636996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Effects of Victim Gender Identity, Juror Gender, and Judicial Instructions on Victim Blaming, Crime Severity Ratings, and Verdicts in Sexual Assault Trials.
    Carter LM; Goodmon LB; Urs M; Rutledge-Jukes H
    J Homosex; 2023 May; 70(6):1187-1224. PubMed ID: 35171085
    [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 effects of juror anonymity on jury verdicts.
    Hazelwood DL; Brigham JC
    Law Hum Behav; 1998 Dec; 22(6):695-713. PubMed ID: 9874929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Juror Decision Making and Euthanasia: Exploring the Role of Jury Nullification, Manner of Death, and Defendant-Decedent Relationship.
    Scott JD; Bell D; Barry B; Edlund JE
    Psychol Rep; 2023 Dec; 126(6):3052-3070. PubMed ID: 35484479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.