Loftus and Palmer

Question 1

aim? (1)

Answer 1

to investigate whether leading questions effect reliability of EWT, by changing a verb used to describe a car accident and seeing the impact on the participants speed estimates.

Question 2

sample? (1)

Answer 2

45 undergraduates from university of washington.

Question 3

what was the procdure (1)?

Answer 3

seven films were shown lasting from 5-30 seconds long, containing a car accident. participants were then distributed a questionnaire asking them to relay their account of what they saw and then asked “how fast the cars were going when they HIT each other” but the verb varied depending on the condition; including, smashed, collided , bumped, contacted.

Question 4

conclusions? (1)

Answer 4

shows the phrasing of a question can markedly alter their answer. loftus though this was due to either feeling bias towards a certain word not knowing what to go for.

Question 5

what was the aim of experiment 2?

Answer 5

to provide additional insight into the origin of the differentiating speed estimates found in experiment 1. is the change in speed due to the very altering the ptps memory or is it that the word just gave participants an idea of what speed to choose.

Question 6

same size 2

Answer 6

150 students

Question 7

how many films were used 2?

Answer 7

1 including a multiple car accident

Question 8

inital procedure? 2

Answer 8

a questionnaire was given after the film, where ptps were asked to describe the incident in their own words. 50 were asked how fast the car was going when they smashed into each other. 50 was asked how fast they were going when they hit into each other, and 50 werent asked about the speed at all.

Question 9

what happened when the participants returned? 2

Answer 9

one week later the participants were invited back and asked numerous questions the critical question being “ did you see any broken glass” - when there was no broken glass.

Question 10

results 2?

Answer 10

smashed = 16 said yes 
hit = 7 said yes

Question 11

generalisable?

Answer 11

no, as it uses students which is a narrow group to focus on when suggest ewt isnt reliable.
no varied ethnicity.

Question 12

reliability?

Answer 12

use of films = standardised procedure.

she did another study and found similar results.

Question 13

Application?

Answer 13

yes as research shows that the jury trusts EWT more than DNA evidence, therefore it is important to ensure it reliable.

Question 14

results of experiment 1?

Answer 14

• smashed = 40.5mph
• colided = 39.3 mph
• bumped = 38.1mph
• contacted = 31.8mph