Loftus and Palmer

Question 1

In Experiment 1 what is the aim of the investigation?

Answer 1

To investigate the effects of language on memory. How leading questions can altar someone’s memory when they are unsure of what they actually did see. (Distort the eye witness testimony)

Question 2

What are leading questions?

Answer 2

They are designed in a particular way to suggest a an expected answer.

Question 3

What was the design of the study?

Answer 3

Laboratory experiment

Question 4

What measures design did this study use?

Answer 4

Independent measures design

Question 5

Give an advantage and a disadvantage of using an independent measures design
How can this the disadvantages be controlled?

Answer 5

1. They don’t cause an issue with order effects Avoids order effects (such as practice or fatigue) as people participate in one condition only as if they were to participate in multiple conditions they would easily get board.
   A) Con: Differences between participants in the groups may affect results, for example; variations in age, sex or social background. These differences are known as participant variables (i.e. a type of extraneous variable).
2. They require a large sample- twice as many participants used.

Control: Participants should be randomly be assigned to their groups and they should be similar on average which reduces participant variables.

Question 6

Give an advantage and a disadvantage of using a Lab experiment

Answer 6

1. Very highly controlled and also this makes the study scientific
2. Doesn’t relate to real life.

Question 7

Describe the sample used in experiment 1?

Answer 7

They were 45 American students divided into 5 groups containing 9 people in each.

Question 8

Why is the study ethnocentric?

Answer 8

Because they are all from the same school from America and al from the same cultures.

Question 9

What is an independent measures design?

Answer 9

where two groups in an experiment consists of different individuals.

Question 10

What are order effects?

Answer 10

The order of sequence the participants are tested in effects the results

Question 11

What is the independent variable of this study?

Answer 11

The verb in the questions that the participants were asked

Question 12

What was the dependent variable?

Answer 12

The speed reported by the participants

Question 13

In experiment 1 what were the videos shown?
Include:
Duration 
how many 
and why in a random order

Answer 13

There were 7 films shown each with a duration of 5-30 seconds and they were presented in a random order to each group and they were presented like this to prevent order effects influencing the results.

Question 14

What happened after the participants were shown the video clips?

Answer 14

After watching the video clips the participants were asked to describe what happened as if they were the eyewitness

Question 15

What type of questions were they asked?

Answer 15

They were asked a specific questions including the question ‘About how fast were the cars going when they (collided/smashed/hit/bumped/contacted) each other?’

Question 16

Outline two conclusions of Experiment 1

Answer 16

1. Due to response factors participants were unsure of the correct answer, the wording of the question influences there answer
2. The form of the question used causes a change in the participants memory representation of the accident.

Question 17

What was a finding when participants were asked the questions using the verbs hit and smashed?

Answer 17

The finding was the participants that were asked the question with the verb ‘smashed’ estimated a higher speed that what the participants did with the question with the verb ‘hit’.

Question 18

Which condition was reported the highest speed recorded? and what was the rest of the speed estimates?

Answer 18

Smashed at 40.8mph 
collided at 39.3
bumped at 38.1]
hit at 34
contacted 31.8

Question 19

How many questionnaires was there?

Answer 19

7 for each video.

Question 20

What was the aim of experiment 2?

Answer 20

The second experiment was to identify which explanation was correct

Question 21

What was the design of experiment 2?

Answer 21

Independent measures design

Question 22

Describe the sample used?

Answer 22

150 American students that were divided into 3 groups with 50 participants in each group.

Question 23

FACT CARD

Answer 23

The second experiment was to see if the participants recall information they would expect to see but did not actually occur.

Question 24

In experiment 2 what video clip where they shown?
Include:
How many participants viewed it
what was it about

Answer 24

150 students were shown the clip for a duration of 1 minute the clip which contained a 4 second scene of a multiple car accident. Then the participants were questioned about it.

Question 25

How many condition were in experiment 2? and describe them.

Answer 25

3 conditions and 3 groups
Group 1 (50)- How fast were the cars going when they ‘hit’ each other?
Group 2 (50)- How fast were the cars going when they ‘smashed’ into each other?
Group3 (50)- weren’t asked any questions at all as they were the control group

Question 26

What happened a week later?
Include:
did they watch a video
what were they asked

Answer 26

The participants returned a week later but did now watch a video instead they were asked a series of questions and a critical question. The critical questions was ‘ Did you see any broken glass?’

Question 27

Was there actually any broken glass?

Answer 27

no

Question 28

FACT CARD

Answer 28

The critical question was placed randomly in the sets of questions on the participants paper.

Question 29

How many people in the smashed condition said they saw broken glass?

Answer 29

16

Question 30

How many people in the hit condition said they saw broken glass?

Answer 30

7

Question 31

How many people in the smashed condition said they didn’t see glass?

Answer 31

34

Question 32

How many people in the hit condition said they didn’t see glass?

Answer 32

43

Question 33

How many people in the control group said they did or didn’t see broken glass?

Answer 33

6 said they did and 44 said they didn’t

Question 34

What interpretations did loftus and palmer give from the results of their first experiment?

Answer 34

They argued that the result of their results was due to the distortion of memory as the verb labelled the intensity of the crash so the speed can be labelled as to how bad the crash was and this is what the participants based their answers of.
Secondly, the results could’ve been due to response bias factors this is when the participants are asked the leading questions they are unsure of the answer so their answer fits in relatively to the question this is classed as demand characteristic.

Question 35

How does the second experiment support the explanation of the first experiment?

Answer 35

They developed an explanation called the reconstructive hypothesis.

Question 36

What are two kinds of information that loftus and palmer argue how then go into a persons memory after an event.

Answer 36

The fist type is the information that’s goes in after experiencing an event e.g. the videos of the car crashes and the second is the information supplied to us after an event The questions containing hit or smashed.

Question 37

FACT CARD

Answer 37

Over time, the information supplied from both sources can be combined in such a way where you don’t know from which source some specific detail can be recalled. All we have is one memory.
For example in loftus and palmer 2nd experiment form some memory of the video they have witnessed. The experimenter then, while asking, “About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?” supplies a piece of external information, namely, that the cars did indeed smash into each other. When these two pieces of information are integrated, the participant has a memory of an accident that was more severe than in fact it was. Since broken glass corresponds to a severe accident, the participant is more likely to think that broken glass was present

Question 38

What type of data did they collect?

Answer 38

quantitative data this is easier to analyse but lacks detail