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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36226574)

  • 61. The Impact of Prior Trial Experience on Mock Jurors' Note Taking During Trials and Recall of Trial Evidence.
    Lorek J; Centifanti LCM; Lyons M; Thorley C
    Front Psychol; 2019; 10():47. PubMed ID: 30733695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Expert testimony pertaining to battered woman syndrome: its impact on jurors' decisions.
    Schuller RA; Rzepa S
    Law Hum Behav; 2002 Dec; 26(6):655-73. PubMed ID: 12508700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Who Is the Rotten Apple? Mock Jurors' Views of Teacher-Student Sexual Contact.
    Anderson A; Wingrove T; Fox P; McLean K; Styer E
    J Interpers Violence; 2018 May; 33(9):1449-1471. PubMed ID: 26621035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. The influence of accounts and remorse on mock jurors' judgments of offenders.
    Jehle A; Miller MK; Kemmelmeier M
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Oct; 33(5):393-404. PubMed ID: 19082696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. The effect of jury deliberations on jurors' propensity to disregard inadmissible evidence.
    London K; Nunez N
    J Appl Psychol; 2000 Dec; 85(6):932-9. PubMed ID: 11125657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. 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]  

  • 67. 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]  

  • 68. Impact of Evidence Type and Judicial Warning on Juror Perceptions of Global and Specific Witness Evidence.
    Wheatcroft JM; Keogan H
    J Psychol; 2017 Apr; 151(3):247-267. PubMed ID: 27982750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. The use of religion in death penalty sentencing trials.
    Miller MK; Bornstein BH
    Law Hum Behav; 2006 Dec; 30(6):675-84. PubMed ID: 17051441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. 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]  

  • 71. Effects of child interview tactics on prospective jurors' decisions.
    Johnson JL; Shelley AE
    Behav Sci Law; 2014; 32(6):846-66. PubMed ID: 25470811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Interrogations, confessions, and adolescent offenders' perceptions of the legal system.
    Arndorfer A; Malloy LC; Cauffman E
    Law Hum Behav; 2015 Oct; 39(5):503-13. PubMed ID: 26011040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. Do laypeople recognize youth as a risk factor for false confession? A test of the 'common sense' hypothesis.
    Grove LJ; Kukucka J
    Psychiatr Psychol Law; 2021; 28(2):185-205. PubMed ID: 34712091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Videotaped interrogations and confessions: a simple change in camera perspective alters verdicts in simulated trials.
    Lassiter GD; Geers AL; Handley IM; Weiland PE; Munhall PJ
    J Appl Psychol; 2002 Oct; 87(5):867-74. PubMed ID: 12395811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. The influence of a defendant's body weight on perceptions of guilt.
    Schvey NA; Puhl RM; Levandoski KA; Brownell KD
    Int J Obes (Lond); 2013 Sep; 37(9):1275-81. PubMed ID: 23295503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. What are we studying? Student jurors, community jurors, and construct validity.
    Keller SR; Wiener RL
    Behav Sci Law; 2011; 29(3):376-94. PubMed ID: 21766327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. False-evidence ploys and interrogations: mock jurors' perceptions of false-evidence ploy type, deception, coercion, and justification.
    Forrest KD; Woody WD; Brady SE; Batterman KC; Stastny BJ; Bruns JA
    Behav Sci Law; 2012; 30(3):342-64. PubMed ID: 22315159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Nature, nurture, and capital punishment: How evidence of a genetic-environment interaction, future dangerousness, and deliberation affect sentencing decisions.
    Gordon N; Greene E
    Behav Sci Law; 2018 Jan; 36(1):65-83. PubMed ID: 28881042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. 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]  

  • 80. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.