Loftus and Palmer Flashcards
AIM (1) exp.1
To investigate whether the phrasing of a question can be used to effect speed judgement
AIM (2) exp.2
To see if eye witness testimony (EWT) was fragile and could be easily distorted
SAMPLE for experiment 1
45 people, split into 5 conditions - hit, smashed, collided, bumped and contacted
SAMPLE for experiment 2
150 university students split into 3 conditions (each containing 50 people) - smashed, hit and control group
Weakness - Sample
All participants were college students and were taught by Loftus herself. Their education level may have affected their estimates and because they had knowledge of psychology, this could have provoked demand characteristics.
Strength - Sample
A large sample was used, especially in experiment 2. This means that anomalies are less likely to effect the results making them more valid.
PROCEDURE in experiment 1
Each participant watched 7 clips, each containing a traffic accident and lasting from 5 to 30 seconds. The critical question was imbedded in a list of 10 questions and in total the experiment lasted about an hour and a half.
What was the critical question in exp.1?
“about how fast was the cars going when they _____ into each other?” The verb for each condition was inserted in the space above.
Why was experiment 2 conducted?
To give additional insights into the origins of different speed estimates.
PROCEDURE in experiment 2
The films shown in experiment 2 lasted 1 minute with the car accident lasting around 4 seconds.
What was the critical question in exp.2?
“About how fast were the cars going when they ____ into each other?” The verbs ‘smashed’ and ‘hit’ were inserted in the space above along side no verb control condition.
What happened after the first critical questions?
Participant’s were asked one week later “did you see any broken glass?”. This was to test if the smashed condition would say yes.
Strength - Validity
The films were shown in different orders for each participant and the critical question was imbedded into a list of 10 questions. This all reduces order effects as different conditions experience a different order of questions.
Weakness - Validity
Both experiments lack mundane realism as watching a video of a car crash is much different to watching a real life car crash therefore it would elicit different emotional feelings which ultimately could influence the estimates of the speeds of the cars.
Weakness - Opposing evidence
Yuille + cutshall dispute these findings - gun crime witnesses gave accurate reports 4 months after the event took place despite the fact they had 2 leading questions.
