Loftus and Palmer

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

• Looks at memory of eye witness testimony.
• wanted to see the effect leading questions had on the memory of an event.

Question 2

EXP 1

Independent and Dependent variable

Answer 2

IV - the wording of the critical question

“About how fast were the cars going when they …. into each other”

DV = the speed estimate in miles per hour

Question 3

EXP 1

Experimental designs

Answer 3

Independent measures - participants only take part in one condition

Snapshot design - Data only collected in a short amount of time on one occasion

Question 4

EXP 1

Sample?

Answer 4

-Opportunity sample

45 undergraduate psychology students from University of Washington

• 5 GROUPS OF 9

Question 5

EXP 1

Details of experiment

Answer 5

Shown 7 clips of traffic accidents

Taken from training films used by the Seattle police department and the Evergreen Safety Council.

4 clips were of staged crashes and the speeds of vehicles were known. (20mph, 30mph, 40mph and 40mph)

Between 5 and 30 seconds long.

Order of clips seen were random (not all participants saw the clips in the same order)

Question 6

EXP 1

Verbs?

Answer 6

–Smashed

–Collided

–Bumped

–Hit

=Contacted

Question 7

EXP 1

Controls?

Answer 7

= Double blind control

Order of clips were randomised

Question 8

EXP 1

Conclusion

Answer 8

ØWording of a question does have an effect on the estimate of speed.

-The more severe words produced higher estimates.

Reasons for this:

The question caused distortion (a change) in participants memory evidence of reconstructed memory.

Response bias- Participants did not know the answer so merely looked at the wording of the question for cues.

Therefore the memory did not actually change, more like demand characteristics.

Question 9

EXP 2

Method and why is it that method?

Answer 9

• laboratory experiment
• Manipulation of variables/ controlled environment

Question 10

EXP 2

Independent and Dependent variable

Answer 10

IV - Wording of critical question

“About how fast were the cars going when they…. into each other

Smashed/Hit

Control Condition = Participants did not receive the estimating speed question.

DV - Speed estimates

• Whether the participants reported seeing broken glass

Question 11

EXP 2

Experimental designs

Answer 11

Independent measures - participants only take part in one condition

Longitudinal design - Study carried out over a period of time, data was collected on more than one occasion from participants

Participants were shown one short clip of a multiple car crash that lasted less than one minute and then asked to answer a questionnaire. After one week they returned and answered a further 10 questions about the accident. Therefore, data was collected from participants on two occasions and over a period of time.

Question 12

EXP 2

Sample?

Answer 12

-Opportunity sample

150 undergraduate psychology students from University of Washington

• 3 GROUPS OF 50
• Hit/Smashed/ Control

Question 13

EXP 2

Details

Answer 13

1 min film, 4-sec scene of a multiple car accident.

Then asked similar questions to experiment one. (including the estimating speed question for the experimental conditions).

Week later returned and asked a further 10 questions about the accident, with the critical question being ‘Did you any broken glass’. (there had been no broken glass in the clip)

Question 14

EXP 2

Conclusion

Answer 14

no sig difference between the control and ‘hit’ group.

The way the accident is represented in the memory after seeing the film was substantially changed by the use of the word ‘smashed’ in the speed estimate question’.

Evidence of memory distortion – memory can be changed as a result of information received after a memory has been made.

Question 15

Ethnocentrism Explanation

Answer 15

Research which is ‘centred’ around one cultural group is called ‘ethnocentric’. If a study is ethnocentric it can cause our views of something to be biased by the values and standards of our own. The sample in this study only focuses on one cultural background and results cannot be generalised beyond this group.

Question 16

Validity - Strength - Point

Answer 16

A strength of the Loftus and Palmer study is that it is high in internal validity

Question 17

Validity - Strength - Explain

Answer 17

A number of controls have been put in place to ensure that extraneous variables (variables the researcher does not intend to measure) do not impact the DV.

Question 18

Validity - Strength - Evidence

Answer 18

Loftus and Palmer used an independent measures design, in experiment one participants either received the critical speed estimate question with the verb smashed, hit, collided, bumped or contacted. This lowered the chance of participants guessing the aim and changing the behaviours (their estimates of speed) to please or displease the researcher.

Question 19

Validity - Weakness - Point

Answer 19

A weakness of the Loftus and Palmer study is that it can be said to be low in internal validity.

Question 20

Validity - Weakness - Explain

Answer 20

Although a number of controls have been put in place not all extraneous variables have been controlled for and therefore they may not have been measuring the impact of the IV on the DV

Question 21

Validity - Weakness - Evidence

Answer 21

Loftus and Palmer used an independent measures design participants, in experiment one participants either received the critical speed estimate question with the verb smashed, hit, collided, bumped or contacted. As different participants are in each condition their individual differences (participant variables) could impact the speed estimates given e.g. their level of experience with driving.

Question 22

External Validity - Weakness - Explain

Answer 22

This study is low in ecological validity, it did not reflect a real life situation and therefore results cannot be applied to situations ad people beyond this study.

or

This study is low in population validity, this means the sample did not included a large cross section of the population and results cannot be generalise to people beyond the study.

Question 23

External Validity - Weakness - Evidence

Answer 23

In the Loftus and Palmer study participants watched a video of a car accident and were then asked a number of questions regarding those incidents. A video is not a true reflection of the experience participants would have if they were witness to a car accident. If witnessing a real accident participants wouldn’t be aware that it was going to happen, may pay less specific attention to detail and feel more emotionally affected.

Or

Participants in the Loftus and Palmer study were all undergraduate Psychology students from Washington, 45 in experiment one and 150 in experiment two. This sample is not reflective of the general population and therefore results cannot be applied to anyone who isn’t an undergraduate Psychology student fro Washington.

Question 24

EXP 1

Method and why is it that method?

Answer 24

• laboratory experiment
• Manipulation of variables/ controlled environment

Question 25

Reliability - Strength - Point

Answer 25

A strength of the Loftus and Palmer study is that it is high in external reliability.

Question 26

Reliability - Strength - Explain

Answer 26

The procedure was standardised meaning that a number of controls have been put in place to ensure that all participants had a similar experience. Therefore another researcher should be able to repeat the study and receive the same results.

Question 27

Reliability - Strength - Evidence

Answer 27

Loftus and Palmer ensured all participants in experiment one watched the same seven clips of car accidents. The participants also received the same questionnaire regarding their memory of these clips, the only thing that changed was the verb in the leading questions. All participants were asked ‘About how fast were the cars going when they ………….. into each other?’ but they either received the verb smashed, hit, collided, contacted or bumped.

Question 28

Relation to Key Theme: Memory

Who?

Answer 28

: Loftus and Palmer studied undergraduate Psychology students from the University of Washington, 45 participants in experiment 1.

Question 29

Relation to Key Theme: Memory

What?

Answer 29

•The study looked at eye witness testimony and the effect of leading questions.

Question 30

Relation to Key Theme: Memory

How?

Answer 30

• In experiment 1 participants watched seven clips of car accidents and were then asked a range of questions, one being the critical question ‘About how fast were the cars going when they ………….. into each other?’. Participants either received the verb smashed, hit, collided, bumped and contacted.

Question 31

Relation to Key Theme: Memory

Findings?

Answer 31

•Participants who received the verb ‘smashed’ in the critical question gave a higher mean average speed estimate (40.5mph) than participants that received the verb ‘contacted’ in the same question (31.8 mph).

Question 32

Relation to Key Theme: Memory

Link to key theme?

Answer 32

•This shows that memory of an incident can be affected by the information received after the event- i.e. the wording of questions.

Question 33

Relation to Key Area: Cognitive

Assumption

Answer 33

·The cognitive area looks at mental processes as key to understanding human behaviour. The mind can be seen as an information processor it’s important to consider the input, processing and output of information.

Question 34

Relation to Key Area: Cognitive

Aim

Answer 34

Loftus and Palmer wanted to see the effect leading questions had on the memory of an event. Specifically if changing a word within a question could have an effect on the answer given – in regard to speed estimates or reporting of broken glass.

Question 35

Relation to Key Area: Cognitive

Findings

Answer 35

·Participants who received the verb ‘smashed’ in the critical speed estimate question gave a higher mean average speed (40.5mph) than participants that received the verb ‘contacted’ in the same question (31.8 mph).

Question 36

Relation to Key Area: Cognitive

Linking study to assumption

Answer 36

·This showed that data input at other times than at time an incident is witnessed can interfere with the processing and output, what is reported.

Question 37

Procedure EXP 2

Answer 37

All participants were shown a one-minute film which contained a four-second multiple car crash.

They were then given a questionnaire which asked them to describe the accident and answer a set of questions about the incident.

There was a critical question about speed:

One group was asked, “About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?” Another group was asked, “About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?”

The third group did not have a question about vehicular speed.

One week later, all participants, without seeing the film again, completed another questionnaire about the accident which contained the further critical question, “Did you see any broken glass - Yes/No?” There had been no broken glass in the original film.

Question 38

Procedure EXP 1

Answer 38

All participants were shown the same seven film clips of different traffic accidents which were originally made as part of a driver safety film. After each clip participants were given a questionnaire which asked them firstly to describe the accident and then answer a series of questions

about the accident. There was one critical question in the questionnaire: “About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?”

One group was given this question while the other four groups were given the verbs “smashed, collided, contacted or bumped, instead of hit

Question 39

Results EXP 2

Answer 39

Question 40

Results EXP 1

Answer 40

Question 41

Method Evaluation

Answer 41

P: One strength of the research method is that it was a lab exp. conducted in a controlled environment.

E: This controlled E.V.s allowing cause and effect to be established. (IV had affected the DV) = high internal validity

E: For example, L&P used precise timings of the films, randomised the presentation of the question order, and included distractor questions. This ensured that the effect of leading questions on the speed estimate was accurately measured.

Question 42

Data - strength

Question 43

Ethics - strength

Answer 43

P: Minimal ethical issues E: P’s had right to withdraw, were protected from harm and were debriefed. E: Researchers showed films of staged car crashes that had been filmed for H&S training so this should not have upset students

Question 44

Reliability

Answer 44

P: High control so easily replicable

E: clear standardised procedures and operationalised variables

E: The instructions were standardised, the car crashes were fully operationalised eg taken from a H&S video and the study is very easy to replicate.

Question 45

Validity - weakness

Answer 45

P: Low external validity – in particular ecological validity

E: not applicable to real life

The car crashes were watched in an artificial environment so lack realism – it is highly unlikely that anyone would watch a car crash like that in real life. The p’s may also have worked out the aim especially in experiment 2 so there could be demand characteristics

Question 46

Validity - strength

Answer 46

P: High internal validity

E: highly controlled with an IV and DV

E: High control throughout the experiment – car crash clips, length of clips, questions asked etc. meant that L&P could be sure that they were measuring what they intended to measure

Question 47

Sampling Bias

Answer 47

P: lacks representativeness and population validity

E: cannot generalise to the rest of the population as it was specific to just students

E: Students, so used to be tested on, unlikely to be drivers than the population on the whole so less good at estimating speeds, they are also younger which means that leading questions are more likely to have an impact.

Question 48

Ethnocentrism

Answer 48

P: Only studied American students

E: based on only one culture – individualistic

E: Reflects only educated cognitive processes – students come from MC backgrounds on the whole and other people may perform differently The individualistic culture of America – concerned about themselves whereas people in collectivistic cultures are more influenced by the group

Question 49

Results EXP 2

Answer 49

Question 50

Method evaluation - weakness

Answer 50

P: However it was artificial situation = low ecological validity E: the task carried out in the study is not realistic to real life – lacks mundane realism E; Car crashes will create more emotion if seen in real-life and would have more motivation to recall the speed more accurately so leading questions may have less of an impact.

Question 51

Data WEAKNESS

Answer 51

P: Not qualitative E: There was no opportunity to explain why P’s didn’t have the chance to say what they remembered about their experience of the car crash or why they estimated the speed as they did

Question 52

Ethics - Weakness

Answer 52

P: Did not gain informed consent

E: didn’t tell them the aims

P’s were not fully aware of the aims – but they couldn’t be as this would have caused demand characteristics