Loftus & Palmer Flashcards
What year was this experiment done?
1974
What was the key theme?
Memory
Background - what was Loftus interested in?
- Fragility of memory (how easily we forget info)
- Validity of eyewitness testimony
Background - what did Loftus believe could influence memory of an event?
Stress and the way interviews are carried out
Define schema theory
Ability to retain info and demonstrate this through behaviour
Define reconstructive memory
Way in which our biases and prejudices can unconsciously lead us to have inaccurate memories
Define leading questions
Question that suggests what answer is desired
Aim
To investigate effect of language on memory
What research method was used in the study? How do we know?
Lab experiment
Controlled setting and Iv manipulated by researcher
How was data collected in the study?
Self report - questionnaire
Sample in exp.1
45 students from Washington
5 groups of 9
IV in exp.1?
5 verbs used in question:
hit
collided
smashed
contacted
bumped
What was the question in exp.1?
How fast were the cars going when they - each other?
DV in exp.1?
Estimated speed of car in videos
Procedure in exp.1?
Shown 7 staged vids (Seattle Police Safety Department)
Lasted 5-30secs
4/7 had known speed
Different order each time
Given questionnaire after each clip (give account and answer questions)
Why is self report the key way of collecting data in the cognitive area?
Is the only way to study thought processes
Results from exp.1
Smashed 40.8
Collided 39.3
Bumped 38.1
Hit 34.0
Contacted 31.8
Conclusions from exp1
People not good at estimating speed of cars
Form of question does change answer given by witness
Explanation of results from exp1: response bias
Word in critical question biases p to give different speed estimate
Explanation of results from exp1: memory change
Word in critical question changed the memory of how fast the car went
Experimental design in exp2?
Independent measures
Describe sample in exp2
150 students from washington
3 groups of 50
Procedure in exp2 (stage 1)
Clip (1min) multiple car crash (4secs)
Answered question:
-speed of cars when hit?
-speed of cars when smashed?
-not about speed
Procedure from exp2 (stage 2)
Week later
10 more questions including
“did you see any broken glass”
IV in exp2?
3 conditions:
hit
smashed
control
Controls in exp2?
video used
time between testing
critical question
DV in exp2?
No of p who said they remembered seeing broken glass
Results in exp2 (how many said they saw broken glass)
Smashed 16p
Hit 7p
Control 6p
Conclusions from exp2
Form of question does change witness memory
Explanation of findings
2 things make up our memory of a complex event:
Own perception - what you think happened
External info - content given after event
Which ethical guidelines did they uphold and how?
Consent - agreed to take part in memory experiment
Which ethical guidelines did they break and how?
Deception - not told specifics
Protect from harm - may have been upset from videos
Is the study ethnocentric?
Only applicable to washington students
Could be argued memory is universal so doesn’t matter
Discuss internal reliability
Is standardised and replicable - same questions for people in same conditions and same timescales
Discuss external reliability
Large sample so is consistent effect
9 per condition in exp1 may not be enough
Discuss internal validity
Could be demand characteristics from leading questions
Very controlled
Discuss external validity
Population - bad (all students from USA)
Ecological - bad (video was fake)
