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 *

141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35460096)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. The impact of individual differences on jurors' note taking during trials and recall of trial evidence, and the association between the type of evidence recalled and verdicts.
    Lorek J; Centifanti LCM; Lyons M; Thorley C
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(2):e0212491. PubMed ID: 30779768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Threshold point utilisation in juror decision-making.
    Curley LJ; MacLean R; Murray J; Pollock AC; Laybourn P
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2019; 26(1):110-128. PubMed ID: 31984068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. The impact of frequency of behavior and type of contact on judgments involving a criminal stalking case.
    Magyarics CL; Lynch KR; Golding JM; Lippert A
    Law Hum Behav; 2015 Dec; 39(6):602-13. PubMed ID: 26237334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Town vs. gown: a direct comparison of community residents and student mock jurors.
    Hosch HM; Culhane SE; Tubb VA; Granillo EA
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):452-66. PubMed ID: 21351133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The Failure of All Mothers or the Mother of All Failures? Juror Perceptions of Failure to Protect Laws.
    Stanziani M; Cox J
    J Interpers Violence; 2021 Jan; 36(1-2):NP690-NP711. PubMed ID: 29294952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. When jurors' moral judgments result in jury nullification: moral outrage at the law as a mediator of euthanasia attitudes on verdicts.
    Peter-Hagene LC; Ratliff CL
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2021; 28(1):27-49. PubMed ID: 34552378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [The influence of decision task and deliberation style on the verdict of the juries].
    Martín ME; de la Fuente EI; García J; De la Fuente L
    Psicothema; 2006 Nov; 18(4):772-7. PubMed ID: 17296116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Racial Composition of Couples in Battered Spouse Syndrome Cases: A Look at Juror Perceptions and Decisions.
    Mossière A; Maeder EM; Pica E
    J Interpers Violence; 2018 Sep; 33(18):2867-2890. PubMed ID: 26917572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors.
    Carlson KA; Russo JE
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2001 Jun; 7(2):91-103. PubMed ID: 11477983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Juror decision making in not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder trials: Effects of defendant gender and mental illness type.
    Mossière A; Maeder EM
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2016; 49(Pt A):47-54. PubMed ID: 27237958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Abuse Is Abuse: The Influence of Type of Abuse, Victim Age, and Defendant Age on Juror Decision Making.
    Sheahan CL; Pica E; Pozzulo JD
    J Interpers Violence; 2021 Jan; 36(1-2):938-956. PubMed ID: 29294918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Saving damsels, sentencing deviants and selective chivalry decisions: juror decision-making in an ambiguous assault case.
    Meaux LT; Cox J; Kopkin MR
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2018; 25(5):724-736. PubMed ID: 31984048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Waiving goodbye to youth: Jurors perceive transferred juveniles differently from adults but render similar verdicts.
    Katzman J; Fessinger MB; Bornstein BH; McWilliams K
    Behav Sci Law; 2022 Nov; 40(6):835-858. PubMed ID: 36226574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Estimating juror accuracy, juror ability, and the relationship between them.
    Park K
    Law Hum Behav; 2011 Aug; 35(4):288-305. PubMed ID: 20658261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Chaos in the courtroom reconsidered: emotional bias and juror nullification.
    Horowitz IA; Kerr NL; Park ES; Gockel C
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Apr; 30(2):163-81. PubMed ID: 16786405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.