COGNITIVE: Loftus and Palmer (1974)

Question 1

What was the GENERAL aim of the study?

Answer 1

To test whether the phrasing of questions about a car accident could alter participants’ memory of an event.

Question 2

What was the aim for experiment 1 of the study?

Answer 2

To see whether using different VERBS to describe a collision between 2 cars would affect estimates of the speed at which they were travelling when crash took place.

Question 3

What was the aim for experiment 2 of the study?

Answer 3

Whether different speed estimates from experiment 1 were actually because of DISTORTION of memory.

SO, to see whether participants who heard the words associated with high-speed estimates would be likely to incorrectly remember BROKEN GLASS at the crash site.

Question 4

How many participants took part?

Answer 4

Experiment 1 = 45 students into 5 groups of 9

Experiment 2 = 150 students into 3 groups of 50

Question 5

What design were the two experiments?

Answer 5

Laboratory experiment, Independent measures design

Question 6

What was the independent and dependent variable of experiment 1?

Answer 6

IV: Verb used in critical question.
-HIT/BUMPED/COLLIDED/SMASHED/CONTACTED

DV: The mean estimated speed of the car.

Question 7

What was the procedure for experiment 1?

Answer 7

1) Participants shown 7 films of car crashes
2) afterwards all participants were asked to write an account of the accident and then to answer a series of questions (filler & one critical)

Question 8

What was the critical question asked for experiment 1?

Answer 8

“How fast were the cars going when they ___ each other?”

Hit, bumped, collided, contacted, smashed

Question 9

What were the results of experiment 1?

Answer 9

• Poor estimating speeds. (most of the estimates were completely off)
  With actual speed of 20mph people estimated mean = 37.7mph

-People estimated higher speed for SMASHED (40.5mph) and least for CONTACTED (31.8mph).

Question 10

What 2 conclusions were made from experiment 1?

Answer 10

1) RESPONSE BIAS - when participants unclear what to estimate, the verb gives them a CLUE to whether they should estimate high/low figure.
2) MEMORY DISTORTION - the verb used ALTERS participant’s memory of the crash.

Question 11

What was the independent and dependent variable of Experiment 2?

Answer 11

IV = The verb used in the critical question asked.
(HIT/SMASHED/WASNT ASKED ABOUT SPEED- control)

DV = Number of participants saying they saw broken glass.

Question 12

What was the procedure of experiment 2?

Answer 12

1) All participants watched a film of a car crash
2) All participants given questionnaire with series of questions. Critical question with either SMASHED or HIT when asked about speed and 1 control group with no question asking for speed.
3) A week later, the participants returned and answered whether they saw broken glass.

Question 13

What were the results?

Answer 13

• As in exp 1 participants who hears SMASHED estimated a higher speed.
• MORE THAN TWICE as many people incorrectly remembered seeing broken glass having heard SMASHED (16) compared to HIT(7) /CONTROL GROUP (6).

Question 14

What conclusions were made from experiment 2 and therefore the overall whole study?

Answer 14

• The way in which questions about events are WORDED can affect the way in which those events are remembered.
• Post event questions actually become part of the memory for that event. SO wording of questions can distort event memory.

Question 15

Why was experiment 2 important?

Answer 15

It supports conclusion of MEMORY DISTORTION from experiment 1 and strongly suggests that its not simply due to response bias.

Question 16

Was the study valid?

Answer 16

High control over extraneous variables.
eg. use of filler questions to avoid finding out and demand characteristics.

but lacks ecological validity as it was a RECORDING of car crashes so the participants may have had less motive to remember or pay attention and better view of car crash than they would in real life.

Question 17

Was the study reliable?

Answer 17

Yes, laboratory procedures are highly standardised and result of exp 1 and 2 show similar results and agree. shows consistency.

Question 18

What was a problem with the sample?

Answer 18

No detail on gender or age.
But they were students.
Not representative.
Also students are used to taking in information and being tested on plus most students may not drive so they have little knowledge on accurately guessing speeds.