Test
AQA-Psychology- Memory
Este test tiene tiempo límite, así que se abre en el reproductor de siempre.
Preguntas del test (24)
1Johnshon and scott studied the effects of what on EWT?
- AThe effects of a weapon focus and anxiety
- BThe effects of anxiety levels
- CThe effects of leading questions
- DThe effects of post event discussion
- EThe effects of wepon focus
2Johnson and Scott conducted the study with two anxiety conditions, High and Low, what happened in each condition?
- ALow anxiety: A man walked through the waiting room with a pen covered in grease
- BLow anxiety: A man walked through the waiting room with a knife
- CHigh anxiety: Particpants heard glass break and a man walked through with a blood covered knife
- DHigh anxiety: A loud nosie was heard, a man walked through with a knife and bllod on his hands
3Johnson & Scott: In which condition was it easier to identify the man?
- AHigh anxiety
- BLow anxiety
4Johnson & scott concluded that paticpants fixated on the [blank_start]weapon[blank_end], this is known as '[blank_start]tunnel theory[blank_end]' or '[blank_start]weapon focus[blank_end]'. Therfore they were [blank_start]less[blank_end] able to identify the man holding the knife. in cases where a weapon is present, EWT is likely to be [blank_start]less[blank_end] reliable.
- Aweapon
- Bobject
- Cknife
- Ditem
- Etunnel theory
- Ftunnel vision
- Gtunnel veiw
- Hweapon focus
- Iweapon veiw
- Jweapon vison
- Kless
- Lmore
- Mless
- Nmore
5Johnson & Scott Evaluation:
Participates may fixate on weapons because of the [blank_start]supprise[blank_end] rather than the idea of the weapon being [blank_start]threating[blank_end] itself. Pickel observed the same effects when a [blank_start]raw chicken[blank_end] was in a hairdressers- Asupprise
- Bawareness
- Cthreating
- Dcovered in blood
- Eraw chicken
- Fcat
- Grubber glove
6Yuille and Cutshall studied the effects of anxiety on EWT, What was the real life event they studied?
- AA gun shop shooting, where the thief was shot dead
- BA petrol station shooting where the owner was shot dead
- CA petrol station shooting where the thief was shot dead
- DA gun shop shooting, where the owner was shot dead
7Yullie and Cutshall studied 13 out of the 21 eye witnesses from the event. How long after the original event did Yullie and Cutshall interview the Orginal EW?
- A4 to 5 weeks
- B4 to 5 days
- C4 to 5 months
8How was the accuracy determined of the eye witnesses testimony determined? And How did Y&C measure the stress of the EW at the time of the shooting?
- Aparticipants were asked to rate their stress and weather they had had trouble sleeping after the event.
- Bparticipants rated their stress out of 10 and then if they went to sleep that night
- CParticipants interviews were compared to original police interviews
- DPolicemen who conducted the first interviews watched the study and said if they were similar
9The Yerkes Dobson law is a theory that show people with very low and very high [blank_start]anxiety[blank_end] are not [blank_start]effective[blank_end] eyewitnesses. People who have a [blank_start]medium[blank_end] level of anxiety are alert enough to [blank_start]pay attention[blank_end] but no so anxious they do not get [blank_start]fixated[blank_end] on the particular aspects of the event.
- Amedium
- Bsome
- Cmiddle
- Deffective
- Ereliable
- Ftrustworthy
- Gfixated
- Hdrawn
- Iattached
- Jpay attention
- Kwatch
- Lsee the event
- Manxiety
- Nfear
- Oalertness
10What did Loftus and Palmer's study the effect on EWT?
- ALeading Questions
- BAnxiety
- CWeapon focus
- DTime
11Loftus and Palmer study involved showing participants a video clips of a lorry and car colliding
- AVerdadero
- BFalso
12Yuille and Cutshall found more detail than the police when they interviewed Eyewitnesses
- AVerdadero
- BFalso
13Yuille and Cutshall found eyewitnesses were [blank_start]reliable[blank_end] and not [blank_start]manipulated[blank_end] by the researchers. The eye witnesses were not [blank_start]inaccurate[blank_end], unlike those in [blank_start]lab studies[blank_end]. The [blank_start]misleading[blank_end] questions had little or no effect on recall [blank_start]disagreeing[blank_end] with Loftus theory
- Areliable
- Bunreliable
- Cinaccurate
- DAccurate
- Emanipulated
- Finfluenced
- Glab studies
- Hfake situations
- Imisleading
- Jinfuentaul
- Kdisagreeing
- Lagreeing
14What were the key strengths of Yuille and Cutshall study?
- AGood External Validity
- BData is subjective (quantitative data)
- CCan be generalised
- DStrong scoring system
15Yuille and Cutshall's study has a weak scoring system what is another weakness of their study?
- ACannot be generalised
- BLacks external validity
- CDisruption to eyewitnesses
16Loftus and Palmer found that leading questions were biased of the EWT of the event. The verb '[blank_start]contacted[blank_end]' resulted in an estimated speed of [blank_start]31.8mph[blank_end] compared to the verb '[blank_start]smashed[blank_end]' the estimated speed was [blank_start]41.5mph[blank_end]. This showed that the more [blank_start]violent[blank_end] the verb, the [blank_start]faster[blank_end] the car was estimated to be going.
- Acontacted
- Bsmashed
- Chit
- Dbumped
- E31.8mph
- F41.5mph
- Gsmashed
- Hcollied
- Icrashed
- Jthrashed
- K41.5mph
- L31.8 mph
- Mviolent
- Nagressive
- Ofaster
- Pslower
17Loftus and Palmer concluded that eyewitness testimony could be manipulated by the wording of questions. This shows it is possible to prompt a response where people can be lead to a false answer, even though memories were not altered
- AVerdadero
- BFalso
18What are the Key evaluation points for Loftus and Palmers study?
- ALimited real life applications (lab experiment)
- BBiased and Limited sample
- CVery reliable and repeatable
- DLacks can be generalisation
- EQuantitative data
19What was the aim of Gabbert's study into EWT?
- AThe effects of leading questions
- BThe effects of post event discussion
- CThe effects of anxiety
20Gabbert's sample consisted of 60 students from the university Aberdeen, and 60 adults from the local community. The participants watched a video of a [blank_start]girl stealing a wallet.[blank_end]
Participants were tested individually ([blank_start]control group[blank_end]) and in pairs ([blank_start]co-witness group[blank_end]), the co-witness group were told they watched the same video however they the had watched different videos of the same crime. Only one had witnessed the girl stealing the wallet.
Participants in the co-witness group [blank_start]discussed[blank_end] the crime together. All of the participants answered a [blank_start]questionnaire[blank_end] on the event- Agirl stealing a wallet.
- Bgirl stealing bread
- Cgirl shoplifting
- Dcontrol group
- Eco-witness group
- Fdiscussed
- Gwatched
- Hrecalled
- Iquestionnaire
- Jquestions
21What were Gabbert's findings?
- A71% of the co witness group recalled information the hadn't seen
- B71% of the co witness group were accurate with there recall of events
- C60% of the co witness group said the girl was guilty
- D60% of the co witness group said the girl was not guilty
22What did Gabbert conclude from her study into the event of post event discussion of EWT?
- Apost event discussion has a powerful effect on EWT
- Bpost event discussion has little effect on EWT
23What is a strength of Gabberts study?
- APopulation Validity
- BEcological Validity
- CExternal Validity
24What are two weaknesses of Gabbert's study?
- ANot ecologically valid
- BNo explanation for why post event discussion disrupts EWT
- CNot a whole explanation for EWT
- DNot population validity
Información
- Descripción
- Pyschology// memory
- Autor
- Charlotte Akester
- Idioma
- English
- Visitas
- 45
- Etiquetas
- Valoración
- Aún sin valoraciones Valora este test