Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/48

Click to flip

48 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

What was loftus & Palmers hypothesis?

Wanted to test language used in eye witness testimony and if it can alter memory

What was loftus and palmers aim?

To show that leading questions or phrasing Q's differently can influence eye witness testimony judgments on speed. To see how accurately people remeber details of accidents

Name loftus and palmers experiment name and year

Car crash experiment - 1974

Name the previous research to loftus and Palmer?

Bartlett - memory is not completely accurate and is made from experiences and expectations = reconstructed memory

Explain bartletts study (loftus and Palmer - previous research) ?

He told participants to recall North American folk tale from native Indian folk - people changed it to to make it shorter, simpler and to fit expectations

Devlin report ?

Conviction rate was 74% in 3000 cases because of EWT

How did Elizabeth loftus test the reliability of EWT

Used mock jurors - had to vote guilty/not for fictional shop robbery


Final evidence convinced highest nm of guilty verdicts

What research method did loftus and Palmer use?

Lab experiment

What experimental design was used by loftus and Palmer?

Independant group design

What conditions were used for the 2 experiments in the loftus and Palmer study?

1st experiment: 5 conditions each containing 9 participants (5 diff verbs in the same question)

What was the independant variable for the 2 studies for the loftus and Palmer study?

The wording of the question (verb)

What was the DV for the 2 experiments in the loftus and Palmer study?

1st: participants estimates speeds


2nd: answer to critical question (about broken glass)

Where was the location of the loftus and Palmer study?

University of Washington

What was the DV for the 2 experiments in the loftus and Palmer study?

1st: participants estimates speeds


2nd: answer to critical question (about broken glass)

How many participants were used in the first study loftus and Palmer carried out?

45 American students

How many participants were used for the second experiment in the loftus and Palmer study

150 uni students

How were the participants selected for the loftus and Palmer study ?

Through opportunity sampling

What did the participants have to do in the 1st experiment?

They were shown 7 clips for 5-30 seconds


After each clip, thy were asked to write an account of what they saw


Were asked 5 questions - about how fast cars were going when they (smashed, collided, bumped, hit, contacted) each other

What did participants in the 2nd experiment have to do in the loftus and Palmer study?

Shown a 1 min clip - which had a 4 sec traffic accident


150 split into 3 groups and asked questions


50 - how fast were cars going when they hit each other


50 - how fast cars were going when they smashed into each other


50 - weren't asked about speed


Week later = did you see broken glass (critical question)

Give me a strength and weakness for the method used in loftus and palmers experiment (evaluation) ?

S: Exp 1: presented films in in a random order - so no order effects (boredom and tired)


W: only obtained quantitative data - doesn't say why people behaved like they did

Give me a strength and weakness for the reliability in loftus and palmers experiment (evaluation) ?

S: standardised procedure - replicable


W: demand characteristics (guess aims/ look for clues)

Give me a strength and weakness for the validity in loftus and palmers experiment (evaluation) ?

S: controlled - know iv affected the dv


W: low ecological validity - lack mundane realism ( vid of crash, not real life)

Give me a strength and weakness for the sample in loftus and palmers experiment (evaluation) ?

S: 2nd experiment - 150 students (large enough to generalise)


W: 1st experiment: lack population validity - (45 students) - less experienced drivers, so less confident to estimate speed

Give me a strength and weakness for the validity in loftus and palmers experiment (evaluation) ?

S: controlled - know iv affected the dv


W: low ecological validity - lack mundane realism ( vid of crash, not real life)

Give me a strength and weakness for the ethics in loftus and palmers experiment (evaluation) ?

S: protection of ppts - not witnessing in real life, only film. Informed consent and debrief


W: deception - asked about broken glass = believed into thinking there was broken glas

What were the results of the first experiment of loftus and Palmer?

Of the 5 verbs used


Smashed = 40.8mph


Collided = 31.8mph

What reasons did loftus and Palmer give for the average speed estimates of smashed being the highest?

Response bias factors - participants were unsure and adjusted to fit expectations of experimenter, distortion in memory, intense verbalisation

What conclusion did l&P draw from the first experiment?

That 2 kinds of information enter a persons memory of a compex event - info perceiving event and other info supplied after the event

What reasons did loftus and Palmer give for the average speed estimates of smashed being the highest?

Response bias factors - participants were unsure and adjusted to fit expectations of experimenter, distortion in memory, intense verbalisation

What were the results from the second experiment?

Smashed = 2x as likely to see broken glass (16/50 said yes)


Controlled group = 6/50 saying yes

What conclusions did l&P draw from the second experiment?

Memory is easily distorted by questioning tehniques and info acquired after event - that merge with original memory (reconstructive memory)

Name one piece of evidence that supports l&Ps original research?

Bartlett - recall and spread Native American folk tale

How did bartletts findings support l&P's research

Showed memory is innacurate and EWT can be affected by expectations

Critically asses bartletts study?

Not applicable to real life, l&P research better than lab - better controlled than Bartlett

Name one piece of evidence that contradicts l&Ps original research?

Bekerian and Bowers - replicated stop signs by loftus et al. Gave slides in original order and doing that recollection was now the same for the consistent and misleading questions

How does bekerian and bowers research contradict l&P's?

Study suggested that it wasn't the misleading questions that altered perception, but presentation of slides

Critically asses bartletts study?

Not applicable to real life, l&P research better than lab - better controlled than Bartlett

Critically assess bekerian and bowers study?

Potential confounding variable - presentation of slides


L&p lack internal validity - not representative of real EWT

Name a piece of evidence which supports l&p (not Bartlett) ?

Loftus and zanni - showed short film clip car accident, asked if seen 'a or the' broken headlight.

Why did loftus and zannis experiment support l&P's research?

Shows that information provided after an event can affect our recollection of kit

Critically asses loftus and zanni research?

Low ecological validity - lacked mundane realism because showed clips

Name one piece of evidence which supports l&p ( not Bartlett) ?

Yuille and cutshall - real life accident, gun sell owner chased robber and robber was killed ( found post event info doesn't affect memory for real life events)

Critically asses Yuille and cutshall' study?

Unethical - to distort memory of who witnessed crime.


Sample size too small - lack pop validity


Witnesses who were closer - experienced more stress

Name the studies which support and contradict l&P's?

Bartlett - support


Bekerian and bower - contradict


Loftus and zanni - support


Yuille and cutshall - support

What was the estimate of speed for the smashed condition?

40.8mph

What was the estimate of speed for the contacted condition?

31.8mph

How many participants took part in experiment 1?

45

How many participants took part in experiment 2?

150