Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology > Cognitive - Loftus and Palmer > Flashcards

Cognitive - Loftus and Palmer Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
AP® Psychology flashcards Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

What is the background of this study?

A

Loftus was interested in the fragility of memory how easily we can forget information - also heavily interested in the validity of eye witness testimony. She believed stress could influence the memory of the event they had witnessed as well as the way the interview was carried out

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are leading questions?

A

Questions that lead respondents to a certain answer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is eyewitness testimony?

A

The account given by people who have seen a certain event

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What was the aim?

A

To investigate the effect of language on memory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What was the research method?

A

Lab experiment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What was the experimental design used in study 1?

A

Independent measures

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What was the sample used in study 1?

A

45 students split into 5 conditions (9 per conditions)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What were the IVs in study 1?

A

The question: ‘About how fast were the cars going when they ________ each other’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What were the DVs in study 1?

A

Mean speed estimate in mph

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What were the 5 verbs?

A

Contacted, bumped, hit, collided, and smashed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What was the procedure in study 1?

A

Sample was shown clips from Evergreen Safety Council fo the Seattle Police Department. The clips lasted between 5 and 30 seconds. 4/7 clips contained staged crashes of which the speed was shown. Clips were shown in a different order. After each clip they were given a questionnaire of 2 parts (give an account of the accident, then they would answer questions on the accident)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

How was data collected in study 1?

A

Self-report

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What were the controls in study 1?

A

Clips shown, questionnaires given, critical question

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What was the mean estimate of car speeds by participants when the car was going 20 mph?

A

37.7 mph

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What was the mean estimate of car speeds by participants when the car was going 30 mph?

A

36.2 mph

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What was the mean estimate of car speeds by participants when the car was going 40 mph?

A

39.7 mph

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What was the mean estimate of car speeds by participants when the car was going 50 mph?

A

36.1 mph

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What was the mean speed estimate for the verb smashed?

A

40.8 mph

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What was the mean speed estimate for the verb collided?

A

39.3 mph

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What was the mean speed estimate for the verb bumped?

A

38.1 mph

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What was the mean speed estimate for the verb hit?

A

34.0 mph

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What was the mean speed estimate for the verb contacted?

A

31.8 mph

23
Q

What was the type of data collected in study 1?

A

Quantitative

24
Q

What were the conclusions of study 1?

A

People aren’t good at estimating speed, and the form of the question given does change a witness’ answer

25
Q

What was the explanation of results for study 1?

A
  1. Response bias - the tendency to give an answer based upon the situation
  2. Language used changes the memory of the event
    (This is what they aimed to loo at in the second experiment)
26
Q

What was the experimental design for experiment 2?

A

Independent measures - different people in each group

27
Q

What was the sample of experiment 2?

A

150 students in 2 conditions - 50 per group

28
Q

What was the IV in experiment 2?

A

The leading question asked of participants

29
Q

What was the DV in experiment 2?

A

Accuracy of memory “Did you see any broken glass” - all of the videos had none

30
Q

What was part 1 of the procedure in experiment 2?

A

Participants watched clips lasting 1 minute of multiple car crashes (4 seconds), they then answered a questionnaire which was asking about the speed of the cars when they smashed or hit into each other

31
Q

What was part 2 of the procedure in experiment 2?

A

A week later participants returned to answer ten more questions including the critical “did you see any broken glass?”

32
Q

How was the data collected in experiment 2?

A

Self report - used a questionnaire

33
Q

What were the controls in experiment 2?

A

Clips shown, the question asked a week later, the questionnaire, same researchers

34
Q

What was the mean estimate of speed (mph) for subjects interrogated with smashed?

A

10.46

35
Q

What was the mean estimate of speed (mph) for subjects interrogated with hit?

A

8

36
Q

What was the number of people who said they did see glass in the smashed condition?

A

16

37
Q

What was the number of people who said they didn’t see glass in the smashed condition?

A

34

38
Q

What was the number of people who said they did see glass in the smashed condition?

A

16

39
Q

What was the number of people who said they did see glass in the hit condition?

A

7

40
Q

What was the number of people who said they didn’t see glass in the hit condition?

A

43

41
Q

What was the number of people who said they did see glass in the control group?

A

6

42
Q

What was the number of people who said they didn’t see glass in the control group?

A

44

43
Q

What was the type of data collected in experiment 2?

A

Quantitative

44
Q

What was the conclusions in experiment 2?

A

The question asked after an event can affect the speed a witness perceives as well as whether they saw broken glass

45
Q

What was the explanation of results for experiment 2?

A

Reconstruction memory - due to 2 influences - our own perception of the original event and external information given after the event - overtime these can be merged

46
Q

What ethical guideline was upheld?

A

Consent - students consented to taking part in the study (however they were told it was a study on memory)

47
Q

What ethical guideline was broken?

A

Deception - they weren’t told the true aim and they were lead to believe there was broken glass
Harm - viewing crashing video could cause harm

48
Q

Point for internal reliability?

A

Replicated procedure with heavy controls - 7 videos to ensure it wasn’t just for ONE video

49
Q

Point for external reliability?

A

Study 1 - sample too small
Study 2 - Sample sufficient to suggest consistent effect

50
Q

Point for internal validity?

A

Very controlled tests and the critical question was hidden amongst filler questions

51
Q

Point for external (ecological) validity?

A

Eye witness interviewers are usual (exp 2) but not questionnaires - not really crashes and only video clips

52
Q

Point for external (population) validity?

A

Students perhaps better at memory? - large sample overall

53
Q

Is this study applicable only to the culture in which the reattach was carrier out, or could the findings apply elsewhere?

A

The study was only carried out on American Students - however it is argued that cognitive processes are universal (the same for everyone)

Psychology (22 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions