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 *

240 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6930909)

  • 21. The role of the psychiatrist in the criminal justice system.
    Bazelon DL
    Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1978; 6(2):139-46. PubMed ID: 708910
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Mock juror perception of sexual assault nurse examiner testimony.
    Wasarhaley NE; Simcic TA; Golding JM
    Violence Vict; 2012; 27(4):500-11. PubMed ID: 22978071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Insanity defense in criminal trials and limitation of psychiatric testimony. Report of the Board of Trustees.
    JAMA; 1984 Jun; 251(22):2967-81. PubMed ID: 6716625
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. The bottom line: the effect of written expert witness statements on juror verdicts and information processing.
    ForsterLee L; Horowitz I; Athaide-Victor E; Brown N
    Law Hum Behav; 2000 Apr; 24(2):259-70. PubMed ID: 10810841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Impact of expert psychological testimony on the unreliability of eyewitness identification.
    Loftus EF
    J Appl Psychol; 1980 Feb; 65(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 7364708
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Battered women who kill: the impact of expert testimony and empathy induction in the courtroom.
    Plumm KM; Terrance CA
    Violence Against Women; 2009 Feb; 15(2):186-205. PubMed ID: 19126834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. On the preparation and use of psychiatric expert testimony: some suggestions in an ongoing controversy.
    Watson AS
    Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1978; 6(2):226-46. PubMed ID: 708916
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Potential jurors' opinions on the effects of hypnosis on eyewitness identification: a brief communication.
    Labelle L; Lamarche MC; Laurence JR
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1990 Oct; 38(4):315-9. PubMed ID: 2258247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. Criminal responsibility and mental health experts: the A,B,Cs of cross-examination.
    Manarin B
    Med Sci Law; 2002 Apr; 42(2):135-46. PubMed ID: 12033468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Reaction of mock jurors to testimony of a court appointed expert.
    Cooper J; Hall J
    Behav Sci Law; 2000; 18(6):719-29. PubMed ID: 11180418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The effects of complexity on jurors' verdicts and construction of evidence.
    Horowitz IA; Bordens KS; Victor E; Bourgeois MJ; ForsterLee L
    J Appl Psychol; 2001 Aug; 86(4):641-52. PubMed ID: 11519648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Psychiatry on trial: clinical and ethical problems in the psychiatric assessment of competency to stand trial.
    Weinstein HC
    Ann N Y Acad Sci; 1980; 347():12-9. PubMed ID: 6930891
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The influence of psychiatric pre-sentence reports.
    Campbell IG
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 1981; 4(1-2):89-106. PubMed ID: 7327821
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. The presentation of forensic psychiatric evidence in court.
    Gutheil TG
    Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sci; 2000; 37(2):137-44. PubMed ID: 10994298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The judge's view of competency evaluations. II.
    Owens H; Rosner R; Harmon RB
    Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1987; 15(4):381-9. PubMed ID: 3427240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Expert testimony in capital sentencing: juror responses.
    Montgomery JH; Ciccone JR; Garvey SP; Eisenberg T
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2005; 33(4):509-18. PubMed ID: 16394228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.