Evaluation of the classic research Flashcards
Methodology and procedure- Research method (lab experiment)?
One main strength is that L&P used lab experiment and ensured that the experiment was controlled so therefore internal validity was high
Methodology and procedure- Research method (lab experiment), how was there experiment controlled?
An experiment, allowed L+P to form a cause and effect relationship. Occurred through the manipulating of the IV
Controlled potential confounding variables to ensure the impact of the dependant variable was due to the independent variable only
Methodology and procedure- Experimental design (independent measures)?
Strength
Each p only completes one condition of iv, less chance of them guessing aim, or experiencing order effects
But can be a weakness because of participant variables (characteristics about the p’s affecting the result)
Methodology and procedure- Ecological validity?
Weekess
Lacks ecological validity, had to watch videos of car crashes so therefore not actually witnessing a crime
Methodology and procedure- Ecological validity- Yuile and Cutshall (1986)?
Their was greater accuracy in giving information four months layer, despite being asked leading questions
Methodology and procedure- Ecological validity- Foster et al 1994?
If p’s watched what they thought to be real life e.g. robbery and were told that their responses would influence the trial, p’s would remember more accurately
Methodology and procedure- Sample?
Sample was students
This is a weakness because it lacks population validity
Since p’s were US university students other groups of people may be more of less prone to being affected by leading q’s?
Methodology and procedure- sample Schacter et al 1991?
Found that elderly people have more difficulty remembering the source of their information, even though their memory of the actual situation is unimpaired
Therefore will be more likely to be affected by leading q’s
Internal validity of study?
Accuracy of the study, does it measure what it intends to
Operationalise the variables
Standardise the procedure
Blind procedure
Randomisation
External validity of the study?
Accuracy beyond the study- can results be generalised
Population, ecological and tempural (is it still appropriate for time were in)
Internal reliability in study?
Consistency within the study
-Standardised procedures
-Operationalise variables
-More than 1 researcher
-Split half reliability
External reliability in study?
Consistency overtime
test retest
Ethics- deception?
The students were not told the aims of the study as this may affect speed estimate results
-From the p pov this was not a serious ethical issue because at probable would not have lead to refusal to take part
Ethics- informed consent?
Students naive of the aims and weren’t aware about study so couldn’t give informed consent
But give retrospective consent after debrief
Ethics- right to withdrawal?
P’s were all students of uni where Loftus was a professor
Therefore feeling obliged to take part and felt unable to refuse to participate
But they were not forced to remain in the experiment and were free to leave anytime
Ethics- protection from harm?
A real car crash may have been distressing to the p and therefore caused long term trauma
So a huge strength of the study was that distress to the p’s was avoided by using film clips of car crashes rather than a real car crash
Scientific benefit of the research?
Loftus overall justification for the minor ethical issues was in the importance of the overall findings
Greatly developed our understanding the reliability of the EWT and reduced the emphasis placed on criminal trials
Social implication- Health
-Affect the health of the wrongly accused
-Stress and emotion of being an eyewitness may have an effect on health meaning greater reliance on the NHS
SI- Families
Impact on families of false convictions
SI- Education?
-The guilty may go unpunished (free)
-Questioning in pastoral situations in school
-Leading questions in the classroom
SI- Law?
-To avoid use of leading questions in police interview, avoiding miscarriages of justice
-Financial cost of retrials and compensation paid to wrongly convicted (£124 bill paid per year), to avoid unreliable inaccurate info being used
-Unreliability of police lineups
Alternative evidence- Braun et al 2002?
Found that collage students who had been exposed to an advertisement with misleading info about bugs bunny or ariel had reported seeing them at disneyland in their childhood- despite the characters not being there
-The college students in the groups who had been exposed to advertisement had reported seeing the characters more than the control groups, who had not seen the advertisement
Who is alternative evidence?
Braun et al
Who are our ecological validty?
Yuile and Cutshall (1986)?
Foster et al
Who are our sample evidence?
Schacter et al 1991?
