Loftus And Palmer

Question 1

Background

Answer 1

Loftus was interested in the fragility of memory- how easily we can forget information. She was also heavily interested in the validity of eyewitness testimony.
She believed stress could influence the memory of the event they had witnessed as well as the way the interview was carried out.

Question 2

Key terms and definitions

Answer 2

Leading questions- question that leads you to a certain answer.
Eyewitness testimony- the account given by people who have seen a certain event.

Question 3

Aim

Answer 3

To investigate the effect of language on memory.

Question 4

Research method, evidence?

Answer 4

Lab experiment

Highly controlled: same questionnaire, videos, time frame. Replicated procedure.

Question 5

Experimental design experiment 1

Answer 5

Independent measures.

Question 6

Sample used in experiment 1

Answer 6

45 students split into 5 conditions (9 per condition) from the university of Washington in America.

Question 7

Strengths and weaknesses of Loftus and Palmer’s sample in experiment 1

Answer 7

Strengths:

• Students are used to remembering things everyday within education.
• Easy to obtain.

Weaknesses:

• Relatively small.
• Only American.
• Only students.

Question 8

IV experiment 1

Answer 8

Verb used within the critical question:

• contacted
• bumped
• hit
• collided
• smashed

Question 9

DV experiment 1

Answer 9

Mean speed estimated in mph.

Question 10

Procedure experiment 1

Answer 10

1. Students were shown 7 clips from Evergreen Safety Council or the Seattle Police Department. The staged clips lasted between 5 and 30 seconds. 4/7 clips contained staged crashes of which the speed when they crashed was known. The clips were shown in a different order for each participant.
2. After each clip they were given a questionnaire of two parts.
   - Firstly they were asked to give an account of the accident.
   - Then they would answer questions on the accident.

The critical question was as follows:
‘About how fast were the cars going when they.......each other.’
This includes one of the following verbs:
-contacted 
-bumped
-hit
-collided
-smashed

Question 11

How was data collected in experiment 1?

Answer 11

Self-report (questionnaire).

Question 12

Controls in experiment 1

Answer 12

The video clips
The questionnaire
The critical question (except the verbs).

Question 13

Results of experiment 1: comparison of speed estimates between each condition.
(In order)
Type of data collected.

Answer 13

• Smashed- 40.8
• Collided-39.3
• Bumped-38.1
• Hit-34.0
• Contacted-31.8

Quantitative data collected.

Question 14

Conclusions of experiment 1

Answer 14

• People aren’t good at estimating speed.

- The form of the question given does change a witnesses answer.

Question 15

Explanation of results in experiment 1

Answer 15

Response bias- tendency to give an answer based upon the situation.
Language used changes the memory of the event (this is what they aimed to look at in the second experiment).

Question 16

Sample used in experiment 2

Answer 16

150 students in 3 conditions

Question 17

The IV and DV for experiment 2.

Answer 17

IV- the leading question asked for participants.

DV- accuracy of memory ‘did you see any broken glass?’

Question 18

Procedure experiment 2

How was data collected?

Answer 18

Participants watched a 1 minute clip of a multiple car crash.
They then answered the first questionnaire which included the critical question which was changed for each group:
-about what speed were the cars going when they hit eachother?
-about what speed were the cars going when they smashed into eachother?
-control condition- not asked about speed.

A week later the participants returned to answer 10 more questions including the critical ‘did you see any broken glass?’

-self report

Question 19

Controls in experiment 2

Answer 19

Critical question ‘did you see any broken glass?’
Same time frame between questionnaires.
All groups shown the same clip.
Same questions in both questionnaires.

Question 20

Results for ‘did you see any broken glass’ for each group in experiment 2.

Answer 20

Smashed:
Yes:16
No:34

Hit:
Yes:7
No:43

Control group:
Yes:6
No:44

Question 21

Conclusions for experiment 2

Answer 21

The questions asked after an event can affect the speed a witness perceives as well as whether they saw broken glass.

Question 22

Explanation of results in experiment 2

Answer 22

Reconstructive memory- memory is reconstructed as a result of 2 influences:

• our own perception of the original event.
• external information given after the event. Over time these can merge and it will be hard to distinguish the difference.

Question 23

Ethics upheld and broken

Answer 23

Upheld:
Consent- students consented to taking part though they were told it was a study on memory.

Broken:
Protection from harm: viewing crash videos could cause emotional distress (though they tried to reduce this by using staged videos).
Deception: the students were told this was a study on memory (not told true aim) and they were let to believe there was broken glass.

Question 24

Internal and external reliability.

Answer 24

Internal: highly controlled and procedure was replicated.
7 videos shown in experiment 1 to ensure it wasn’t just for 1 video.

External:
Sample 1: too small to suggest a consistent effect (45).
Sample 2: sample sufficient to suggest consistent effect (150).

Question 25

Internal, ecological and population validity.

Answer 25

Internal: a very controlled test and the critical question was hidden amongst filler questions so it was an accurate test of eyewitness testimony. No other reason for speed estimate.

Ecological: eyewitness interviews are usual but not questionnaires.
They weren’t real crashed and only video clips (not realistic).

Population: only students. Because they’re young they may have a better memory than the rest of the population. However there was an overall large sample.

Question 26

Ethnocentrism

Answer 26

Only carried out on American students.

However it can be argued that cognitive processes are universal.

Question 27

Area

Answer 27

Cognitive

Question 28

Socially sensitive?

Answer 28

Yes, these results could be used in court hearings when interviewing witnesses.
The memory of the witness can be changed by language used from person questioning (leading questions).
Could lead to a person being wrongfully convicted or released.