memory: loftus & palmer

Question 1

loftus & palmer expt 1 method?

Answer 1

lab expt, imd

iv: verb in critical q
dv: speed estimates

Question 2

loftus & palmer expt 1 sample?

Answer 2

45 university of washington students

5 groups of 9

Question 3

loftus & palmer expt 1 procedure?

Answer 3

shown 7 short (5-30 secs) drivers ed films of car crashes (speeds known on 4)

then completed questionnaire with one critical question

about how fast were the cars going when they…
smashed, collided, hit, bumped, contacted
…each other?

Question 4

loftus & palmer expt 1 results?

Answer 4

smashed: 40.8
collided: 31.8

Question 5

loftus & palmer expt 1 conclusions?

Answer 5

could be down to two reasons:

response bias: wording of question biased answer

memory alteration: wording changes ps memory representation of the event

Question 6

loftus & palmer expt 2 method?

Answer 6

lab expt, imd

iv: verb in critical q
dv: recall of glass and mean speed estimates

Question 7

loftus & palmer expt 2 sample?

Answer 7

150 students

3 groups of 50

Question 8

loftus & palmer expt 2 procedure part 1?

Answer 8

watch 1 min film of 4 sec car crash

directly after ps did questionnaires, 2 with critical q, 1 without

about how fast were the cars going when they smashed/hit each other?

Question 9

loftus & palmer expt 2 part 2?

Answer 9

ps returned a week later and answered another questionnaire

critical q: did you see any broken glass? y/n

there was no broken glass in the film

Question 10

loftus & palmer expt 2 results?

Answer 10

claiming to see broken glass:

smashed: 16 yes
hit: 7 yes
control: 6 yes

Question 11

loftus & palmer expt 2 conclusions?

Answer 11

verb again effected speed estimates

also appeared to modify memories

over double the amount of people who reported broken glass for smashed compared to hit

however it was still a minority

Question 12

loftus & palmer general conclusions?

Answer 12

memory comes from two places, the original event and information provided afterwards

a single memory comes from a merging of these two sources

Question 13

loftus & palmer method evaluation?

Answer 13

highly controlled lab expt, control of extraneous variables

controlled nature ensures reliability

however lack of ecological validity due to artificial films and lack of emotion to situation

Question 14

loftus & palmer data collected evaluation?

Answer 14

quantitative data from speed estimates and recall of broken glass allows for objective comparisons and statistical analysis

but lacks detail

Question 15

loftus & palmer ethicality evaluation?

Answer 15

films selected to avoid causing distress but may trigger painful memories

slight deception in hiding aim, consent not fully informed

findings could be used to discredit eyewitness testimony

Question 16

loftus & palmer validity evaluation?

Answer 16

extraneous variables unlikely to influence results due to controlled nature

some films showed real crashes but context lowers ecological validity

ps prepared to witness an event and no consequences so v different to being an eyewitness

Question 17

loftus & palmer sampling bias evaluation?

Answer 17

students used

not representative of target population (anyone who could be an eyewitness, anyone)

used to having to recall information

youth and lack of driving experience may have hindered their ability to estimate speeds

Question 18

loftus & palmer link to theme?

Answer 18

links to theme of memory as it provides empirical evidence on the effect information given after an event can have on someone’s memory of that event

experimental exploration of leading questions on the accuracy of an eyewitnesses testimony

Question 19

loftus & palmer link to area?

Answer 19

assumption: the mind works like a computer, we input, store and then retrieve information

looks at how input from the original event as well as information given afterwards can form a memory

memory is also a cognitive process