Loftus And Palmer COGNITIVE Flashcards
Aim
2
To investigate the accuracy of memory and in particular the effect of leading questions on what people remember
To see if the leading question changed a persons subsequent memory of the event the witnessed
Design
Both studies laboratory experiments
Independent measures design
Type of study
1st : snapshot study
2nd: longitudinal (1 week)
Sample - first experiment
How many
Who
Groups
45 ps
American college students
5 participant groups: each one condition of IV
Sample - second experiment
How many
Who
Groups
150 ps
American college students
3 groups: control condition + 2 IV
DV
1st and 2nd experiment
1st: estimate of speed
2nd: said saw broken glass or not
Materials / apparatus
Exp one:
7 brief clips of car accidents
Questionnaire
Exp two:
One min film containing 4s multiple car accident
Procedure
Experiment one
Asked to describe accident and given series of questions about film including critical question
In one of 5 conditions: (verbs)
Hit
Contacted
Smashed
Bumped
Collided
Asked on questionnaire estimate cars speed
Procedure experiment 2
Part 1:
Asked to describe clip and asked questions including critical question
3 groups:
Smashed
Hit
Control - no question
Part 2:
Ps asked to return to lab 1 week later
Asked some questions about film key question - did you see any broken glass? (There had not been)
Results
Experiment 1
Mean speeds estimates:
- faster for verbs ie smashed than contacted
- ps not able to accurately estimate speed
Mean speeds:
Smashed - 40.5 mph
Contacted - 31.8 mph
Collided - 39.3 mph
Bumped - 38.1 mph
Hit - 34.0 mph
Results
Experiment 2
Mean speed estimates - faster who had been smashed than with hit
More ps who had smashed saw broken glass (16/50) than others
In other groups 7/50 with hit saw broken glass
6/50 ps in control group saw glass
Overall: most ps correctly reported (121 / 150)
Speeds:
Smashed - 10.46 mph
Hit - 8.0 mph
Strength
Controlled conditions
Extraneous variables be controlled
Ie eyewitness influenced by surroundings
Extraneous variables threaten internal validity
Weakness
Not a real accident - no emotions
Not good at estimating speed
Sampling bias
American students
Strength:
Ps are easy to obtain
Weakness:
Unique characteristics of students
Ethnocentrism