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 *

105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7876035)

  • 1. Electrodermal differentiation of deception: the effect of choice versus no choice of deceptive items.
    Furedy JJ; Gigliotti F; Ben-Shakhar G
    Int J Psychophysiol; 1994 Oct; 18(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 7876035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Electrodermal differentiation of deception: potentially confounding and influencing factors.
    Vincent A; Furedy JJ
    Int J Psychophysiol; 1992 Sep; 13(2):129-36. PubMed ID: 1399752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Efficacy of repeated psychophysiological detection of deception testing.
    Dollins AB; Cestaro VL; Pettit DJ
    J Forensic Sci; 1998 Sep; 43(5):1016-23. PubMed ID: 9729818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Psychophysiological differentiation of deception: the effects of electrodermal lability and mode of responding on skin conductance and heart rate.
    Gödert HW; Rill HG; Vossel G
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2001 Feb; 40(1):61-75. PubMed ID: 11166108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cross-modal physiological effects of electrodermal lability in the detection of deception.
    Waid WM; Wilson SK; Orne MT
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 1981 Jun; 40(6):1118-25. PubMed ID: 7264879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Separating deceptive and orienting components in a Concealed Information Test.
    Ambach W; Stark R; Peper M; Vaitl D
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2008 Nov; 70(2):95-104. PubMed ID: 18674573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Thirty-site P300 scalp distribution, amplitude variance across sites, and amplitude in detection of deceptive concealment of multiple guilty items.
    Lui MA; Rosenfeld JP; Ryan AH
    Soc Neurosci; 2009; 4(6):491-509. PubMed ID: 18633836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The roles of deception, intention to deceive, and motivation to avoid detection in the psychophysiological detection of guilty knowledge.
    Furedy JJ; Ben-Shakhar G
    Psychophysiology; 1991 Mar; 28(2):163-71. PubMed ID: 1946882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Can simultaneously acquired electrodermal activity improve accuracy of fMRI detection of deception?
    Kozel FA; Johnson KA; Laken SJ; Grenesko EL; Smith JA; Walker J; George MS
    Soc Neurosci; 2009; 4(6):510-7. PubMed ID: 18633826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Orienting versus inhibition in the Concealed Information Test: Different cognitive processes drive different physiological measures.
    klein Selle N; Verschuere B; Kindt M; Meijer E; Ben-Shakhar G
    Psychophysiology; 2016 Apr; 53(4):579-90. PubMed ID: 26615984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Electrodermal differentiation of deception: perceived accuracy and perceived memorial content manipulations.
    Furedy JJ; Posner RT; Vincent A
    Int J Psychophysiol; 1991 Jul; 11(1):91-7. PubMed ID: 1856118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Temperature effects on polygraph detection of concealed information.
    MacNeill AL; Bradley MT
    Psychophysiology; 2016 Feb; 53(2):143-50. PubMed ID: 26435532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of biofeedback on the detection of deception.
    Timm HW
    J Forensic Sci; 1987 May; 32(3):736-46. PubMed ID: 3598524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effects of coping and cooperative instructions on guilty and informed innocents' physiological responses to concealed information.
    Zvi L; Nachson I; Elaad E
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2012 May; 84(2):140-8. PubMed ID: 22330977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Combining skin conductance and forced choice in the detection of concealed information.
    Meijer EH; Smulders FT; Johnston JE; Merckelbach HL
    Psychophysiology; 2007 Sep; 44(5):814-22. PubMed ID: 17584188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Neurocognitive mechanisms underlying deceptive hazard evaluation: An event-related potentials investigation.
    Fu H; Qiu W; Ma H; Ma Q
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(8):e0182892. PubMed ID: 28793344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Scoring criteria for response latency and habituation in electrodermal research: a study in the context of the orienting response.
    Barry RJ
    Psychophysiology; 1990 Jan; 27(1):94-100. PubMed ID: 2339192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Laterality of pain in migraine distinguished by interictal rates of habituation of electrodermal responses to visual and auditory stimuli.
    Gruzelier JH; Nicolaou T; Connolly JF; Peatfield RC; Davies PT; Clifford-Rose F
    J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry; 1987 Apr; 50(4):416-22. PubMed ID: 3585352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. ELECTRODERMAL RESPONDING IN HYPERTHYROID PATIENTS.
    Dolu N; Özesmi CD; Suer C; Keleştimur F
    Indian J Physiol Pharmacol; 1999 Jan; 43(1):79-83. PubMed ID: 27093741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A Concealed Information Test with multimodal measurement.
    Ambach W; Bursch S; Stark R; Vaitl D
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2010 Mar; 75(3):258-67. PubMed ID: 20026133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.