Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

An empirical investigation of insanity defense attitudes: Exploring factors related to bias

9 references·9 citing·51 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

1999Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives108,592 cited
2002The Population profile of the United States194 cited
1967Jury and the Defense of Insanity155 cited
1984Death penalty attitudes and conviction proneness: The translation of attitudes into verdicts.132 cited
2001Describing jurors' personal conceptions of insanity and their relationship to case judgments.100 cited
1991A comparison of insanity defense standards on juror decision making.94 cited
2004Venirepersons's Attitudes Toward the Insanity Defense: Developing, Refining, and Validating a Scale.72 cited
1984The death-qualified jury and the defense of insanity.69 cited
1992Jury selection in insanity defense cases63 cited

Cited by

2016Juror decision making in not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder trials: Effects of defendant gender and mental illness type29 cited
2009Measuring Attitudes toward the Insanity Defense in Venirepersons: Refining the IDA-R in the Evaluation of Juror Bias22 cited
2015Educating Canadian jurors about the not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder defence.21 cited
2010Measuring knowledge of the insanity defense: Scale construction and validation20 cited
2015

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

Defendant mental illness and juror decision-making: A comparison of sample types

18 cited

2013Are the misinformed more punitive? Beliefs and misconceptions in forensic psychology18 cited

2019The influence of defendant race and mental disorder type on mock juror decision-making in insanity trials16 cited

2011Attitudes Toward the Insanity Defense in Capital Cases: (Im)partiality fromWitherspoontoWitt15 cited

2015Determining criminal responsibility: How relevant are insight and personal attitudes to mock jurors?13 cited