2.5: Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer (1974) Flashcards
What was the aim of Loftus and Palmer’s study?
The aim of Loftus and Palmer’s study was to assess the extent to which participants’ estimates of the speed of cars involved in accidents witnessed on video could be influenced by misleading questions
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The method and procedure of experiment one was that how many university students were each shown what?
The method and procedure of experiment one was that 45 university students were each shown 7 video clips of car crashes
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The method and procedure of experiment one was that 45 university students were each shown 7 video clips of car crashes.
What did participants do, after each accident?
After each accident, participants:
- Wrote an account of what they could recall
- Answered a specific questionnaire
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The method and procedure of experiment one was that 45 university students were each shown 7 video clips of car crashes.
After each accident, participants wrote an account of what they could recall and answered a specific questionnaire.
There was one what question being to estimate what?
There was one critical question being to estimate the speed of the vehicles
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The method and procedure of experiment one was that 45 university students were each shown 7 video clips of car crashes.
After each accident, participants wrote an account of what they could recall and answered a specific questionnaire.
There was one critical question being to estimate the speed of the vehicles.
How many conditions were there?
There were 5 conditions
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The method and procedure of experiment one was that 45 university students were each shown 7 video clips of car crashes.
After each accident, participants wrote an account of what they could recall and answered a specific questionnaire.
There was one critical question being to estimate the speed of the vehicles.
There were 5 conditions, with how many participants in each condition?
There were 5 conditions, with 9 participants in each condition
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The method and procedure of experiment one was that 45 university students were each shown 7 video clips of car crashes.
After each accident, participants wrote an account of what they could recall and answered a specific questionnaire.
There was one critical question being to estimate the speed of the vehicles.
There were 5 conditions, with 9 participants in each condition, with the conditions varying through what?
There were 5 conditions, with 9 participants in each condition, with the conditions varying through which verb was used in asking the key question
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The method and procedure of experiment one was that 45 university students were each shown 7 video clips of car crashes.
After each accident, participants wrote an account of what they could recall and answered a specific questionnaire.
There was one critical question being to estimate the speed of the vehicles.
There were 5 conditions, with 9 participants in each condition, with the conditions varying through which verb was used in asking the key question - what?
There were 5 conditions, with 9 participants in each condition, with the conditions varying through which verb was used in asking the key question - 1. 'Contacted' 2. 'Hit' 3. 'Bumped' 4. ' Collided' Or, 5. 'Smashed'
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The method and procedure of experiment one was that 45 university students were each shown 7 video clips of car crashes.
After each accident, participants wrote an account of what they could recall and answered a specific questionnaire.
There was one critical question being to estimate the speed of the vehicles.
There were 5 conditions, with 9 participants in each condition, with the conditions varying through which verb was used in asking the key question - ‘Contacted’ , ‘hit’ , ‘bumped’ , ‘collided’ or ‘smashed.’
The participants’ estimations of speed were then what?
The participants’ estimations of speed were then recorded
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The findings of experiment one are that:
1. For the verb of contacted, what was the mean estimate of speed?
The findings of experiment one are that for the verb of contacted, the mean estimate of speed was 31.8 m/h
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The findings of experiment one are that:
1. For the verb of contacted, the mean estimate of speed was 31.8 m/h.
2. For the verb of hit, what was the mean estimate of speed?
The findings of experiment one are that for the verb of hit, the mean estimate of speed was 34 m/h
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The findings of experiment one are that:
1. For the verb of contacted, the mean estimate of speed was 31.8 m/h.
2. For the verb of hit, the mean estimate of speed was 34 m/h.
3. For the verb of bumped, what was the mean estimate of speed?
The findings of experiment one are that for the verb of bumped, the mean estimate of speed was 38.1 m/h
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The findings of experiment one are that:
1. For the verb of contacted, the mean estimate of speed was 31.8 m/h.
2. For the verb of hit, the mean estimate of speed was 34 m/h.
3. For the verb of bumped, the mean estimate of speed was 38.1 m/h.
4. For the verb of collided, what was the mean estimate of speed?
The findings of experiment one are that for the verb of collided, the mean estimate of speed was 39.3 m/h
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment one:
The findings of experiment one are that:
1. For the verb of contacted, the mean estimate of speed was 31.8 m/h.
2. For the verb of hit, the mean estimate of speed was 34 m/h.
3. For the verb of bumped, the mean estimate of speed was 38.1 m/h.
4. For the verb of collided, the mean estimate of speed was 39.3 m/h.
5. For the verb of smashed, what was the mean estimate of speed?
The findings of experiment one are that for the verb of smashed, the mean estimate of speed was 40.8 m/h
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment two:
The method and procedure of experiment two (the broken glass study) is that how many what participants viewed what?
The method and procedure of experiment two (the broken glass study) is that 150 student participants viewed a video of a multi-vehicle car crash
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment two:
The method and procedure of experiment two (the broken glass study) is that 150 student participants viewed a video of a multi-vehicle car crash.
50 were asked what, 50 with what and a what group of 50 what?
- 50 were asked the key question with the word ‘smashed’ in it
- 50 with the word ‘hit’
- A control group of 50 weren’t asked anything about the speed at all
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment two:
The method and procedure of experiment two (the broken glass study) is that 150 student participants viewed a video of a multi-vehicle car crash.
50 were asked the key question with the word ‘smashed’ in it, 50 with the word ‘hit’ and a control group of 50 weren’t asked anything about the speed at all.
How long later the participants were what?
One week later, the participants were questioned about their memory of the event
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment two:
The method and procedure of experiment two (the broken glass study) is that 150 student participants viewed a video of a multi-vehicle car crash.
50 were asked the key question with the word ‘smashed’ in it, 50 with the word ‘hit’ and a control group of 50 weren’t asked anything about the speed at all.
One week later, the participants were questioned about their memory of the event, with the key question being what?
One week later, the participants were questioned about their memory of the event, with the key question being ‘Did you see any broken glass?’
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment two:
The method and procedure of experiment two (the broken glass study) is that 150 student participants viewed a video of a multi-vehicle car crash.
50 were asked the key question with the word ‘smashed’ in it, 50 with the word ‘hit’ and a control group of 50 weren’t asked anything about the speed at all.
One week later, the participants were questioned about their memory of the event, with the key question being ‘Did you see any broken glass?’ even though what?
One week later, the participants were questioned about their memory of the event, with the key question being ‘Did you see any broken glass?’ even though there was none in the film
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment two:
The method and procedure of experiment two (the broken glass study) is that 150 student participants viewed a video of a multi-vehicle car crash.
50 were asked the key question with the word ‘smashed’ in it, 50 with the word ‘hit’ and a control group of 50 weren’t asked anything about the speed at all.
One week later, the participants were questioned about their memory of the event, with the key question being ‘Did you see any broken glass?’ even though there was none in the film.
The number of participants who did what was then recorded?
The number of participants who recalled broken glass was then recorded
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment two:
The findings of experiment two (the broken glass study) are that:
1. In the ‘smashed’ condition, what was the number of participants who recalled broken glass?
The findings of experiment two (the broken glass study) are that in the ‘smashed’ condition, the number of participants who recalled broken glass was 16
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment two:
The findings of experiment two (the broken glass study) are that:
1. In the ‘smashed’ condition, the number of participants who recalled broken glass was 16 (34 said no).
2. In the ‘hit’ condition, what was the number of participants who recalled broken glass?
The findings of experiment two (the broken glass study) are that in the ‘hit’ condition, the number of participants who recalled broken glass was 7
The method and procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s study:
Experiment two:
The findings of experiment two (the broken glass study) are that:
1. In the ‘smashed’ condition, the number of participants who recalled broken glass was 16 (34 said no).
2. In the ‘hit’ condition, the number of participants who recalled broken glass was 7 (43 said no).
3. In the control condition, what was the number of participants who recalled broken glass?
The findings of experiment two (the broken glass study) are that in the control condition, the number of participants who recalled broken glass was 6
The conclusions of Loftus and Palmer’s study are that experiment one showed that misleading information in the form of what can affect what?
The conclusions of Loftus and Palmer’s study are that experiment one showed that misleading information in the form of leading questions can affect memory recall of eyewitnesses
The conclusions of Loftus and Palmer's study are that experiment one showed that misleading information in the form of leading questions can affect memory recall of eyewitnesses. Experiment two (the broken glass study) showed that misleading information in the form of what can also do what?
Experiment two (the broken glass study) showed that misleading information in the form of post-event information can also affect memory recall of eyewitnesses
The conclusions of Loftus and Palmer's study are that experiment one showed that misleading information in the form of leading questions can affect memory recall of eyewitnesses. Experiment two (the broken glass study) showed that misleading information in the form of post-event information can also affect memory recall of eyewitnesses. What do both studies suggest?
Both studies suggest that at recall, misleading information is reconstructed with material from the original memory
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on what?
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (doing what)?
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos)
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos) and as such lacks what?
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is:
- A laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos)
- As such lacks relevance to real-life EWT scenarios
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos) and as such lacks relevance to real-life EWT scenarios.
Therefore, what does it have?
Therefore, it has low ecological validity
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos) and as such lacks relevance to real-life EWT scenarios.
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, why?
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, because it was carried out in a highly controlled environment
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos) and as such lacks relevance to real-life EWT scenarios.
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, because it was carried out in a highly controlled environment, so what?
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, because it was carried out in a highly controlled environment, so we cannot generalise these findings
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos) and as such lacks relevance to real-life EWT scenarios.
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, because it was carried out in a highly controlled environment, so we cannot generalise these findings, why?
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, because it was carried out in a highly controlled environment, so we cannot generalise these findings, because the study was too artificial
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos) and as such lacks relevance to real-life EWT scenarios.
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, because it was carried out in a highly controlled environment, so we cannot generalise these findings, because the study was too artificial.
Witnessing real car crashes would have had what and thus would do what?
Witnessing real car crashes would:
- Have had much more of an emotional impact
- Thus would affect recall differently
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos) and as such lacks relevance to real-life EWT scenarios.
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, because it was carried out in a highly controlled environment, so we cannot generalise these findings, because the study was too artificial.
Witnessing real car crashes would have had much more of an emotional impact and thus would affect recall differently.
Although the study can be replicated to check the results and so is high in reliability, what may the results be due to?
Although the study:
1. Can be replicated to check the results
2. So is high in reliability
,the results may be due to demand characteristics
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos) and as such lacks relevance to real-life EWT scenarios.
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, because it was carried out in a highly controlled environment, so we cannot generalise these findings, because the study was too artificial.
Witnessing real car crashes would have had much more of an emotional impact and thus would affect recall differently.
Although the study can be replicated to check the results and so is high in reliability, the results may be due to demand characteristics, rather than what?
Although the study:
1. Can be replicated to check the results
2. So is high in reliability
,the results may be due to demand characteristics, rather than genuine changes in memory
The evaluation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that the study is a laboratory experiment centred on an artificial task (watching videos) and as such lacks relevance to real-life EWT scenarios.
Therefore, it has low ecological validity, because it was carried out in a highly controlled environment, so we cannot generalise these findings, because the study was too artificial.
Witnessing real car crashes would have had much more of an emotional impact and thus would affect recall differently.
Although the study can be replicated to check the results and so is high in reliability, the results may be due to demand characteristics, rather than genuine changes in memory.
Participants may have just given the answer they thought the researchers wanted, as suggested by what?
Participants may have just given the answer they thought the researchers wanted, as suggested by which verb they heard in the key question