LOFTUS AND PALMER

LOFTUS AND PALMER

1. AIM:

   • To see the effect of leading questions on memory of an event.
   • Specifically if changing the verb on speed estimates.

2. IV: Verbs used in leading question.

3. DV: Speed estimates.

4. EXPERIMENT 1:

   • Participants
     • 45.
   • Clips.
     • 7 clips.
   • After.
     • Questionnaire; distractor questions and one leading question.
   • Verbs.
     • Hit, smashed, bumbled, collided and contacted.
   • Findings:
     • Smashed: 40.8mph.
     • Contacted: 31.8mph.
     • People are bad at estimating speed.
   • Conclusion.
     • Wording of the question did have an effect on the estimates of speed.
     • More severe sounding verbs produced the higher estimates.
   • Explanation for the findings.
     • 1)Response bias factors.
     • Actual distortion.

5. EXPERIMENT 2:

   • Participants.
     • 150 students.
   • Clip.
     • 1 min.
   • Groups.
     • Hit.
     • Smashed.
     • None.
   • Critical question.
     • Glass or not.
   • Asked 1 week later.
   • Findings:
     • Smashed: 16Y.
     • Hit: 7Y.
     • Control: 6Y.
     • Suggested that the word smashed distorts memory- making it more severe.
     • Schema:
       • Glass fits with general understanding of a car accident.

6. CONCLUSION.

   • 2 types of info make up memory of an event.
     • Info we get fro perceiving the event.
     • Info we receive after.

7. STRENGTHS:

   • Lab= highly controlled= reliable.

8. WEAKNESSES:

   • High level of control- artificial situation.
     • Difficult to apply to everyday life.
       • Low EV.
   • Demand characteristics= know they are in an experiment.
   • Students.
     • New drivers.
     • Younger= better memory.
     • Used to taking in lots of information.
     • Can't be generalised.