Loftus & Palmer

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: ChloBR
  • Created on: 15-03-17 16:50
Aim
To investigate the effects of 'leading questions' on an individual's ability to accurately recall events.
1 of 24
Participants
Exp 1 - 45 students (5 groups of 9). Exp 2 - 150 students (3 groups of 150).
2 of 24
Method
Lab experiment. Independent measures. Opportunity Sampling.
3 of 24
IV/DV
IV - wording of critical question (hit/smashed/bumped/contacted/collided). DV - estimated speed (mph)/answer to broken glass question (Yes/No).
4 of 24
Procedure
Exp 1 - shown 7 film clips of crashes. Given questionnaire to describe and answer questions on crash. Estimate speed. Exp 2 - 1 min film of 4 sec car crashes. Questionnaire again. One week later answered question about broken glas
5 of 24
Findings
Speed estimates - Smashed (40.5), Collided (39.3), Bumped (38.1), Hit (34.0), Contacted (31.8). Broken Glass - S/Y (16), H/Y (7), C/Y (6), S/N (34), H/N (43), C/N (44).
6 of 24
Conclusions
Misleading post information can distort memory. Verb used in question can influence the response. People aren't good at judging vehicular speed.
7 of 24
Evaluation - Research
Independent measures - lower demand characteristics and less order effects but harder to compare groups. Lab experiment - good control of variables but low eco validity.
8 of 24
Evaluation - Data
Quantitative data - reliable and objective and can be analysed using inferential statistics but method of measurement may limit response. Qualitative - descriptive and cause and effect but subjective.
9 of 24
Evaluation - Ethical considerations
Protection from harm - couldn't watch real crash so videos were watched. Deception kept to a minimum. Asked for consent and debriefed.
10 of 24
Evaluation - Validity
Low population validity - only students so can't all drive and may judge speed wrong. Low ecological validity -lab and fake videos.
11 of 24
Evaluation - Reliability
High controls - same clips, questions. Can be easily replicated.
12 of 24
Evaluation - Sampling bias
All students, all american. Opportunity so representative.
13 of 24
Evaluation - Ethnocentrism
Most participants were probably American since American study.
14 of 24
Link to area - Definiton
The cognitive area assumes that humans are information processors just like computers, our internal mental processes help us to organize and manipulate the information we receive from our environment, this influences our actions.
15 of 24
Link to area - Study
They investigated the ability of 'leading questions' to affect an individual's mental processes and how accurate memory can be. Findings demonstrated that after watching 7 video clips of crashes pp estimated different verbs due to different verb.
16 of 24
Link to key theme - Definition
Memory involves interpreting what is seen or heard, recording bits of it and then reconstructing these bits into memories when required. This implies that recall can be distorted or biased by features of the situation or environment.
17 of 24
Link to key theme - Study
They investigated the ability of 'leading questions' to distort and eye witness testimony of an event. Concluded that misleading post information can distort memory and it is not reliable.
18 of 24
Similarity to Grant et. al - Point
Both studies were highly controlled lab experiments so they both lacked ecological validity.
19 of 24
Similarity to Grant et. al - Evidence
L&P completed in a lab and used high controls such as same questions and videos of car crashes. Grant completed in school using artificial noise and high controls, same noise and questions.
20 of 24
Similarity to Grant et. al - Elabaration
Low ecological validity so can't be generalized to real life, reduces usefulness. But high controls means higher reliability so improves psychology's reputation.
21 of 24
Difference to Grant et. al - Point
They differ in regards to the aspect of memory that they aimed to investigate.
22 of 24
Difference to Grant et. al - Evidence
L&P investigating how memory can be distorted and how reliable it is using 'leading questions'. Grant aimed to look at how memory can be improved by context-dependency effects.
23 of 24
Difference to Grant et. al - Elaboration
L&P can be applied to eye witness testimonies so that courts can make sure they know it isn't completely reliable to avoid false accusation. Grant et. al can be applied to schools and improving recall of newly-learned material.
24 of 24

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Exp 1 - 45 students (5 groups of 9). Exp 2 - 150 students (3 groups of 150).

Back

Participants

Card 3

Front

Lab experiment. Independent measures. Opportunity Sampling.

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

IV - wording of critical question (hit/smashed/bumped/contacted/collided). DV - estimated speed (mph)/answer to broken glass question (Yes/No).

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

Exp 1 - shown 7 film clips of crashes. Given questionnaire to describe and answer questions on crash. Estimate speed. Exp 2 - 1 min film of 4 sec car crashes. Questionnaire again. One week later answered question about broken glas

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Core studies resources »