Loftus & Palmer

Question 1

What was the aim of Loftus and Palmer?

Answer 1

The aim of Loftus and Palmer was to investigate the effect of language (leading questions) on memory

Question 2

What was the sample of experiment 1?

Answer 2

Sample = 45 American students

—> split into 5 groups of 9

Question 3

What was the procedure of experiment 1?

Answer 3

• ppt’s watched several road safety videos
• some videos involved car crashes
• ppt’s filled out a questionnaire on what they had seen

Question 4

What was the critical question of experiment 1?

Answer 4

‘About how fast were the cars going when they xxxxx each other?’

Question 5

What was the IV of experiment 1?

Answer 5

The IV were the 5 verbs used in the blank spaces :
•bumped
•contacted
•hit
•collided 
•smashed

Question 6

What was the method and design of experiment 1?

Answer 6

Method = lab experiment 
Design = independent measures

Question 7

What was the DV of experiment 1?

Answer 7

The mean number of estimated speed given by the ppt’s

Question 8

What was the mean speed average for the ‘contacted’ condition?

Answer 8

31.8

Question 9

What was the mean speed average for the ‘hit’ condition?

Answer 9

34

Question 10

What was the mean speed average for the ‘smashed’ condition?

Answer 10

40.8

Question 11

What was the aim of experiment 2?

Answer 11

The aim of experiment 2 was to investigate whether ppt’s in the ‘smashed’ condition were more likely to claim that they saw broken glass in a car accident

Question 12

What was the sample of experiment 2?

Answer 12

There were 150 students that were split up into 3 groups of 50

Question 13

What was the procedure of experiment 2?

Answer 13

• ppt’s watched 1 clip of a car crash and given a questionnaire with the critical question
• there were three conditions :
• hit
• smashed
• no critical question

•one week later ppt’s were asked : “Did you see broken glass?”

Question 14

What were the ppt’s speed estimates in experiment 2 for the smashed and hit groups?

Answer 14

SMASHED = 10.46mph
HIT = 8.00mph 

These findings were consistent with the last experiment

Question 15

How many ppt’s claimed to see broken glass?

Answer 15

SMASHED = 16/50
HIT = 7/50
CONTROL = 6/50

Question 16

What are the research method and design of experiment 2?

Answer 16

Method = lab experiment 
Design = independent measures

Question 17

What is the conclusion for experiment 2?

Answer 17

Subsequent information can cause a reconstruction of a persons memory

Question 18

What is reconstructive memory?

Answer 18

The act of remembering which is influenced by cognitive processes, including perception, imagination, semantic memory and beliefs

Question 19

Why was counter balancing used in experiment 1?

Answer 19

It reduces order effects so the ppt’s can not predict whats coming

Question 20

What is meant by ecological validity?

Answer 20

How much the experiment can relate to real-life situations

Question 21

How is watching a film of a car crash different to watching an accident in real life?

Answer 21

The shock of seeing the crash in real life may contribute to their results being more realistic and valid

Question 22

What type of research method was used?

Answer 22

Controlled laboratory

Question 23

What type of data was collected and how was it useful?

Answer 23

Quantitative data was collected and this enabled results to be easily summarised and compared

Question 24

What can you say about the ethics of the study?

Answer 24

The hypothesis about the leading questions was not revealed to the ppt’s and distracter questions were used to further conceal the exact hypothesis. However the study was conducted ethically because the researchers used clips that they knew could not upset the ppt’s.

Question 25

How was this study valid?

Answer 25

It was a controlled laboratory experiment which meant that is was high in design validity because the procedure - including the film clips, tasks and questions asked - was standardised

Question 26

How could this study be invalid?

Answer 26

Ppt’s knew they were in a study and may have tried to affect the outcome. For example, they may have thought they were supposed to remember broken glass, so therefore this may not be a valid demonstration of how leading questions affect memory

Question 27

Why was this study low in ecological validity?

Answer 27

• It was carried out in the controlled conditions of the laboratory
• Accidents happen spontaneously and our memory of this will be different without the luxury of prior warning
• Our memory of watching film clips of a staged accident will be very different to what it might be under stressful circumstances of an accident involving real people

Question 28

Can this study be described as reliable?

Answer 28

Yes, because the study uses highly controlled laboratory experiments.

Question 29

Could this study be replicated and why?

Answer 29

Yes, because the original and subsequent study correlated to see if test-retest reliability could be established

Question 30

Were the findings of this study reliable?

Answer 30

Yes, because both experiments that were carried out provided evidence that memory can be distorted by information introduced afterwards - in this case, leading questions.

Question 31

What type of sampling method was used?

Answer 31

Opportunity and volunteer

Question 32

What was a weakness of the sampling method?

Answer 32

As the ppt’s were students from the same University, results cannot be generalised beyond the sample, and to the wider population

Question 33

What are some problems with the biasing factors in Loftus and Palmer?

Answer 33

• The study needed a broader sample as the sample used reduces generalisability
• Students represent a narrow age group and the upper levels of family income and educational background
• Students have already displayed a higher cognitive skills required to gain entry to uni so are more compliant to authority than their peers in general
• Students will be more willing to comply with researchers’ requests, especially if studies they participate in form part of their course