Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
8 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
what did experiment 1 aim to find |
mean speed estimated for each experimental group |
|
|
what did experiment 1 find for the different verbs |
verb vs estimated speed smashed - 40.8 collided - 39.3 bumped - 38.1 hit - 34 contacted - 31.8 |
|
|
what can you conclude from exp 1 |
the group given the word smashed estimated a higher speed than the other groups and the group given the word contacted estimated the lowest speed |
|
|
what did experiment 2 initially find |
just like in ex1 pps gave higher speed estimates for the smashed condition. smashed 10mph hit 8mph |
|
|
pps returned 1 week later and answered further questions about broken glass, what did they find |
broken glass vs non broken glass smashed 16 vs 34 hit 7 vs 43 control 6 vs 44 |
|
|
conclusion |
a leading question that suggests more damage can change a witnesses answer to that question |
|
|
what were the 2 explanations loftus and palmer gave for witnesses responses being altered |
1. response bias factors. differences in speed estimates happen because the critical word biases response. more dangerous sounding word biases a higher guess 2. memory representation is altered. critical word changes a persons memory so that their preception of the accident is affected (experiment 2 tested this) |
|
|
what do the conclusions suggest |
memory of a complex event is made up of two sources 1. perception of the original event 2. additional external information over time these two pieces of information become integrated |
