reconstructive memory Flashcards
aim yullie and catshall
The effect of leading questions on eyewitnesses are on real crime scene
method yullie and catshall
Crime scene: vancouver. A thief tied up an owner and stole money and guns from a shop. The owner escaped, went outside and the thief shot him twice. There were 21 eyewitnesses.
Contacted 4 months after the event. 13/21 agreed.
- ½ of the group were asked; “did you see a broken headlight on the getaway car”
“Did you see the yellow panel on the car”
- ½ asked : “did you see the broken headlight on the getaway car”
“Did you see a yellow panel on the car”
They were also asked to rate the days stress on a scale of 1-10
There was no broken headlight and the panel was blue
results yullie and catshall
Eyewitnesses were very reliable. Lots of information recalled can be confirmed by the police reports.
10/13 got the answers right
Accuracy was between 79%-84%
strengths yullie and catshall
Strengths:
- Though under lab conditions, the context was naturalistic. Though it is not a natural experiment because IV was manipulated unnaturally
- Archival evidence - police reports to double check accuracy
- Consent was given
weaknesses yullie and catshall
- Has to use a purposive sample-only legible witnesses can take part
- Not replicable or generalizable due to specificity of incident
- Cannot controll confounding variables and participant difference within them 4 months
- Could be a case of FBM thus making it harder to compare to loftus and palmers
- Researcher bias could play a role in quantifying participant responses
- Lab experiment but naturalistic but has different IVS case study. In the exam it can be both experiment and case study but you would have to mention the interviews for case and iv dv for experimental
aim of bartlett
To investigate how memory of a story is affected by previous knowledge. To see if cultural background and unfamiliarity would result in memory distortion.
bartlett participants and experimental technique
british participants
lab experiment
method and procedure bartlett
He told a native american legend - the war of the ghosts.
- Group 1: repeated reproduction. Hearing the story and being asked to reproduce it after a short period of time, then to do so again over a period of days, weeks, months or years.
- Group 2: serial reproduction. Have to recall and repeat the story to another person
results bartlett
- There was no significant difference in the ways that the groups recalled the stories
-Both groups experienced distortion (changing the story as they try to remember it) in three ways - Assimilation; the story becomes more consistent with the participants cultural expectations; to fit with british culture
- Leveling; the story came shorter each retelling due to elimination of unnecessary aspects
- Sharpening: changing the story to make sense of it using familiar cultural terms
They overall remembers the key themes but changed unfamiliar elements to align with cultural expectations
conclusion bartlett
Remembering is not passive but active, where information is retrieved and changed to fit into existing schemas. This is done to make meaning. Bartlett argues that memories are a reconstruction of experiences
strentghs bartlett
It is applicable and explains real life situations so although completed in a lab, has high ecological validity
weaknesses bartlett
- There was not a rigorous methodology. No standardized instructions and no time in which they had to recall. He also did not specify accuracy
- A true experiment aims to establish a cause and effect relation between iv the type of rehearsal and dv recall. Null hypothesis was accepted
- Though many studies claim that culture affects ability to recall, this study does not conclude this. To experiment with this a north american but even still casualty cannot be determined cuz there is no iv
aim loftus and palmer study 1
Aim was to investigate whether the use of leading questions would affect speed estimation
participants loftus and palmer study 1
5 groups of 9
lab experiment
indepednent sample design
procedure loftus and palmer study 1
Iv was: intensity of the verb used
Dv: estimation of the speed
7 videos of crashes of 5-30s
independent sample design - each participant watched each video
Asked to fill out a questionnaire of what they had seen and questions; one being the important one of speed
Speed verbs:
Hit
Collided
Bumped
Smashed
Contacted
loftus and paler results study 1
Hit: 34 mph
Collided 39.3 mph
Bumped 38.1 mph
Smashed 40.8 mph
Contacted 31.8 mph
They argised the verb persuaded response and was connected to certain schemas
aim loftus and palmer study 2
They hypothesized that those who had a high speed estimation would claim that they observed broken glass
participants loftus and palner study 2
150 participants
Random allocation
Shown a crash
Asked to describe it in their own words
5o asked: samshed
50 asked: hit
50 not asked speed
One week later they were given 10 more questions
In this they were asked if they saw broken glass
There wasnt actually broken glass
results loftus and palmer study 2
Smashed speed: 10.46 mph
Hit speed: 8mph
Shashed: 16 glass
Hit: 7 glass
Control: 6 glass
So most answered correctly but smashed had the highest wrong
strengths loftus and palmer
Confounding variables can be minimized
Cause and effect relationship has been successfully established
wekanesses loftus and palmer
Lab experiments have so low ecological validity. It may not have evoked the same emotion as a real crash
Only students, low generalizability
Young and inexperienced drivers, also estimating the speed of a car is a challenging task.
