Loftus & Palmer Flashcards
What was Loftus and Palmer’s aim?
To find out if a leading question alters memory or response and what effect this would have on speed estimations
How can Loftus and Palmer’s study be placed in a legal context?
1960’s people worried about miscarriages of justice due to leading questions. Do people tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? What people say in court is based on one version of the truth - but that truth may not be 100% accurate. Injustices made EWT (eye witness testimony) and leading questions a concern, L&P aimed to test this.
How can Loftus and Palmer’s study be placed in an academic context?
Bartlett got pps to recall an unfamiliar story. He found that pps told it using normalisation and rationalisation this was because their memories were altered by schemas.
How else can L&P’s study be placed in an academic study?
Carmichael’s study showed a verbal label will shape memory and how its recalled. This fits with L&P’s notion of reconstructive memory.
What was Loftus and Palmers research method?
2 lab experiments
What type of sampling method was used?
Opportunity
How many pps were in experiment 1?
45
How many pps were in experiment 2?
150
In experiment 1, how many groups were there?
5
What were each group shown in experiment 1?
7 short films of car accidents
What did the questionnaire the pps were given in experiment 1 ask them to do?
Give an account of what they’ve just seen
What were pps in experiment 1 then asked?
A critical question - about how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
What were the 4 words that replaced hit in experiment 1?
Bumped, Collided, Contacted and Smashed
How many groups were there in experiment 2?
3
What were the 3 groups shown in experiment 2?
A short film with multiple crashes (no broken glass)
What were the first 50 pps asked?
How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?
What were the second 50 pps asked?
How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
What were the final 50 pps asked?
Nothing - they were the control group
How many questions did the pps have to answer a week later in experiment 2?
10
What was one of those questions the pps had to answer a week later in experiment 2?
Did you see any broken glass?
Did the pps realise the aim in both experiments?
No
How did L&P address some ethical issues?
The films only lasted a few seconds - so pps weren’t at much harm
In experiment 1 what depended on which word was used in the critical question?
The estimates given
What was the estimated speed for smashed in experiment 1?
41
What was the estimated speed for contacted in experiment 1?
32
What were the estimates for each word used in experiment 1?
Smashed - 41, Collided - 39, Bumped - 38, Hit - 34 and Contacted - 32
What did L&P conclude from experiment 1 about people?
Their not good at estimating
What did L&P conclude in experiment 1 about answers?
That the form of a question alters the answer given
In experiment 1 what affects estimation that L&P concluded?
A person’s schema
In experiment 2 what was the estimated speed for smashed and hit?
10.5 smashed and 8 hit
What % of pps in the smashed group said there were broken glass in experiment 2?
32%
What % pps in the hit group said there were broken glass in experiment 2?
14%
What % of pps in the control group reported seeing broken glass in experiment 2?
12%
What did L&P conclude after a week in experiment 2?
That a persons recall can still be affected by how they were originally questioned
In experiment 2 what did L&P conclude?
Leading questions alter memory
What did L&P also conclude in experiment 2 that links with Carmichael?
Their findings are in line with Carmichael
Was reliability a strength for L&P?
Yes - scientific conditions, could be repeated and all the films were all the same
Was validity a strength for L&P?
No - carried out in an artificial condition, crashes not real, pps not emotionally involved
Was the sample of L&P’s study strong?
Yes - 195 pps is a large sample, however pps all students from one age and social group so bias
What data was collected from L&P’s study?
Quantitative - comparisons made and predictions can be made about the future and for EWT
What was the only thing that L&P’s study had bad ethics for?
Pps being partially deceived
Who does L&P support and how?
Bartlett - both found that schemas could alter recall, they improved upon the work of Bartlett because L&P used controlled conditions and a more familiar research topic
Whose research supports L&P’s and how?
Loftus and Zanni - showed pps a car crash and then asked some ‘did u see a broken headlight?’ and some ‘did u see the broken headlight?’ 7% reported seeing ‘a’ broken headlight whereas 17% reported seeing ‘the’ broken headlight. This suppports L&P because both studies found leading questions altered memory/recall
Whose evidence challenges L&P’s and how?
Yuille and Cutshall - they interviewed people 4 moths after witnessing a an armed robbery in Canada. 2 leading questions were used, but witnesses still gave recalls of what they had previously reported. This rejects L&P because leading questions may not always alter memory, however Y&C used interviews which are less scientific
