Cognitive Area- loft us and Palmer

Question 1

Background

Answer 1

Interested in researching the reliability of an eyewitness testimony
Effects of language on memory which are introduced after an event(reconstructive memory)

Question 2

Aims

Answer 2

To see if estimates given by participants about speed of vehicles in a car accident was effected by the wording of the question being asked

Question 3

Experimental design

Answer 3

Independent measures

Question 4

Sample in experiment 1:

strengths and weaknesses

Answer 4

45 American students
Split into 5 groups of 9

Large enough sample
But ethnocentric as only in one area and students all same age

Question 5

Experiment 1: independent variable and dependant variables and procedure

Answer 5

IV- bumped, contacted, hit, collided & smashed
DV- estimated speed of vehicle
Procedure- participants shown 7 video clips taken from a video,4 contained a crash. They were asked what they saw and were asked to fill out a questionnaire. Questions identical except critical question, “how fast were the cars going when they (IV) each other?”

Question 6

Experiment 1 results, conclusions and explanation

Answer 6

Mean speed estimate:
Contacted: 31.8
Smashed: 40.8

Wording of question impacts speed estimation

1. Response bias: critical word influences persons perspective
2. Memory changed due to type of language used

Question 7

Experiment 2: aim, sample and variables

Answer 7

Aim: was the speed estimation due to the word used or the genuine memory changing

Sample: 150 students, 3 groups of 50

IV: hit, smashed or no question
DV: estimated speed in mph & if they saw glass

Question 8

Experiment 2: procedure

Answer 8

All participants watched 1 min video clip that has multiple car crashes. Group 1 asked how fast when they HIT each other and group 2 asked how fast when they SMASHED each other?
Group 3 not asked question

After a week they came back and were asked did you see broken glass?

Question 9

Experiment 2: results, conclusions and explanations

Answer 9

Did you see glass?
Smashed- 16 yes compared to hit- 7 said yes
Control group- 6 said yes

Participants in smash group more likely to say they saw broken glass
Leading questions influenced participants

Suggests our memory is reconstructive, our own perception merges with external information and the difference between the two cannot be told apart

Question 10

Ethics

Answer 10

Possibly harmed emotionally from crashes

Question 11

Internal reliability

Answer 11

Easily repeated- controlled and standardised

Had 3 videos out of 7 without crashes so they didn’t work out aim of study

Question 12

External reliability

Answer 12

Could have been more participants in experiment 1

Question 13

Interval validity

Answer 13

Wrong speed estimates due to inexperienced drivers and lack of knowledge

Question 14

Ecological validity

Answer 14

Low- due to artificial experiment and clips not real life became consequences of crash not seen

Question 15

Link to cognitive area

Answer 15

It investigates cognitive process of memory
Specifically aimed to investigate reconstructive memory showing that info shown after an event through leading questions effect the eye witnesses memory