401699
Description
Mind Map by katherine.crick, updated more than 1 year ago
|
Created by katherine.crick
over 10 years ago
|
|
Loftus and
Palmer 1974
- Experiment 1
- Method
- Lab experiment
- 1hr 30
- 1hr 30
- 45 participants
(University of
Washington)
- 5 conditions (5
groups of 9)
- 'About how fast were the
cars going when they
***** each other?'
- SMASHED, HIT,
COLLIDED, BUMPED,
CONTACTED
- 'About how fast were the
cars going when they
***** each other?'
- 5 conditions (5
groups of 9)
- Hypothesis: "The participants
estimate of speed will increase
with the degree of violence
suggested by the question
concerning the car crash."
- Aim: Whether the wording of a
question can influence the
memory recalled.
- DV: the estimated speed
- IV: verb in critical question
- DV: the estimated speed
- Aim: Whether the wording of a
question can influence the
memory recalled.
- 7 film-clips of
traffic accidents
- After each clip, students
were asked to write an
account of the accident
they had just seen
- short excerpts from
safety films made for
driver education
- After each clip, students
were asked to write an
account of the accident
they had just seen
- Lab experiment
- Results
- Conclusions/ Findings
- The form of a question can
affect a witness' answer.
- Humans are inaccurate at
judging the speed of vehicles.
- results may have been distorted the
memory of the participant: it may have
been distorted by the verbal label
which had been used to characterise
the intensity of the crash.
- The form of a question can
affect a witness' answer.
- 'smashed' elicited the
highest speed estimate,
and 'contacted' the lowest.
- Conclusions/ Findings
- Method
- Experiment 2
- Method
- Aim: they wanted to find out if the
participants memories really had been
distorted by the verbal label.
- IV: Wording of question (hit/smashed)
- DV: answer to critical Q (Y/N)
- IV: Wording of question (hit/smashed)
- Lab Experiment
- 150 student participants
- Independent Measures
- 150 student participants
- Participants returned one week later and
answered questions about the accident.
- Critical question: 'Did you see
any broken glass?' was part of a
series of questions in a random
position on each participants
question paper. There was no
broken glass in the film.
- Critical question: 'Did you see
any broken glass?' was part of a
series of questions in a random
position on each participants
question paper. There was no
broken glass in the film.
- all viewed a short (1
minute) film which
contained a 4 second
scene of a multiple
car accident
- 3 condition groups of 50 (SMASHED, HIT,
CONTROL)
- How fast were the
cars going when they
****** each other??
- 3 condition groups of 50 (SMASHED, HIT,
CONTROL)
- Aim: they wanted to find out if the
participants memories really had been
distorted by the verbal label.
- Results
- the verb 'smashed' had a significant effect on the
mis-perception of glass in the film. Participants
in the 'smashed' group were more than twice as
likely to recall seeing broken glass.
- Practical Applications
- highlights the
danger of 'leading
questions' and
shows how eye
witness testimonies
are unreliable for
legal authorities
such as the Police.
- highlights the
danger of 'leading
questions' and
shows how eye
witness testimonies
are unreliable for
legal authorities
such as the Police.
- the verb 'smashed' had a significant effect on the
mis-perception of glass in the film. Participants
in the 'smashed' group were more than twice as
likely to recall seeing broken glass.
- Method
- Evaluation
- Strengths
- Lab experiment- high
and precise controls
- Cause and effect relationship could
be established
- Precise controls of variables e.g.
being asked the same question etc
- Cause and effect relationship could
be established
- Lab experiment- high
and precise controls
- Weaknesses
- Low ecological
validity- set in a lab.
- Demand Characteristics
- response-bias-
participants may be
unsure of the speed
and adjust estimate to
fit expectations of the
questioner.
- response-bias-
participants may be
unsure of the speed
and adjust estimate to
fit expectations of the
questioner.
- Sample: Students are
not representative of
the general population
- they may be less
experienced drivers
and therefore less
confident in their
ability to estimate
speeds
- they may be less
experienced drivers
and therefore less
confident in their
ability to estimate
speeds
- Low ecological
validity- set in a lab.
- Strengths
- Background
- demonstrate that memory is not a factual
recording of an event and can become distorted
by other information which occurs after the event.
- demonstrated
through leading
questions how it is
possible to distort a
person’s memory
of an event.
- demonstrated
through leading
questions how it is
possible to distort a
person’s memory
of an event.
- demonstrate that memory is not a factual
recording of an event and can become distorted
by other information which occurs after the event.
Media attachments
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.