BeattieJM (1991) Scales of justice: Defense counsel and the English criminal trial in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Law and History Review9(2): 222.
2.
BlockCRBloklandAAJvan der WerffC. (2010) Long-term patterns of offending in women. Feminist Criminology5(1): 73.
3.
BurtonRV (1963) Generality of honesty reconsidered. Psychological Review70(6): 481.
4.
CallenCR (2012) Human deliberation in fact-finding. In: RobertsPHunterJB (eds) Criminal Evidence and Human Rights: Reimagining Common Law Procedural Traditions. (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2012).
5.
ChooA (2015) Evidence. Oxford: OUP.
6.
CohenH (1917) Prisoner’s evidence and previous convictions II. Law Quarterly Review33: 60.
7.
DavisDFolletteWC (2003) Toward an empirical approach to evidentiary ruling. Law and Human Behavior27: 661–84.
8.
De LiSMacKenzieDL (2003) The gendered effects of adult social bonds on criminal activities of probationers. Criminal Justice Review28(2): 278.
9.
FerranteAM (2013) Assessing gender and ethnic differences in developmental trajectories of offending. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology46(3): 379.
10.
GendreauPLittleTGogginC (1996) A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works!Criminology34: 575.
11.
HartshorneHMayMA (1928) Studies in the Nature of Character: 1. Studies in Deceit. New York: Macmillan.
12.
HawkinsW (1724) A Treatise of the Pleas of the Crown. Vol 2. London: In the Savoy.
13.
HoughLMOswaldFLOckJ (2015) Beyond the Big Five: New directions for personality research and practice in organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology2: 183–209.
14.
HunterJBHenningTEdmondG. (2015) The Trial: Principles, Process and Evidence. Leichhardt, NSW: Federation Press.
15.
KahnemannDFrederickS (2002) Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In: GilovichTGriffinDKahnemannD (eds) Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
LaceyN (2011) The resurgence of character: Criminal responsibility in the context of criminalisation. In: DuffAGreenS (eds) Philosophical Foundations of Criminal Law. Oxford: OUP, 151–78.
17.
LangbeinJH (2003) The Origins of the Adversary Criminal Trial. Oxford: OUP.
18.
Law Commission (2001) Evidence of Bad Character in Criminal Proceedings. Law Com. 273. London: Law Commission.
19.
Ministry of Justice (2010) Criminal Statistics: England and Wales 2009 Statistics Bulletin. London: Ministry of Justice.
20.
Ministry of Justice (2011) Adult Reconvictions: Results from the 2009 Cohort England and Wales. London: Ministry of Justice.
21.
MundayRJC (1985) Reflections on the Criminal Evidence Act 1898. Cambridge Law Journal44(1): 62.
22.
New Zealand Law Commission (1997) Evidence Law: Character and Credibility. Discussion Paper, 27. Wellington: New Zealand Law Commission.
23.
PalmerA (1994) The scope of the similar fact rule. Adelaide Law Review16: 161.
24.
PennycookGThompsonVA (2012) Reasoning with base rates is routine, relatively effortless, and context dependent. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review19(3): 528.
25.
RedmayneM (2015) Character in the Criminal Trial. Oxford: OUP.
26.
RodermondEKruttschnittCSlotboomA. (2016) Female desistance: A review of the literature. European Journal of Criminology13(1): 3.
27.
SackettPR (1994) Integrity testing for personnel selection. Current Directions in Psychological Science3: 73.
28.
SaksMJThompsonWC (2003) Assessing evidence: Proving facts. In: CarsonDBullR (eds) Handbook of Psychology in Legal Contexts, 2nd edn. Chichester: Wiley.
29.
SampsonRJLaubJH (2005) A life course view of the development of crime. Annals American Academy Political and Social Science602: 12.
30.
SerotaKBLevineTRBosterFJ (2010) The prevalence of lying in America: Three studies of self-reported lies. Human Communication Research36: 2–25.
31.
StoneJ (1935) Cross-examination by the prosecution at common law and under the Criminal Evidence Act, 1898: A commentary on Maxwell v Director of Public Prosecutions. Law Quarterly Review51: 443.
32.
TverskyAKahnemannD (1983) Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review90(4): 293–315.
33.
WellsGL (2003) Murder, extramarital affairs, and the issue of probative value. Law and Human Behavior27(6): 623.
34.
WilliamsEE (1917) Prisoner’s evidence and previous convictions I. Law Quarterly Review33: 53.
35.
ZanderMHendersonP (1993) Crown Court Study. Research Study No. 19. London: HMSO.