Loftus and Palmer

• Background: outline what memory is and refer to schemas

  Memory is the term given to the structures and processes involved in the storage and retrieval of information. Bartlett (1932) suggested that memory is influenced by what an individual already knows, using their past experiences to deal with a new experience, known as schemas.
• Background: outline reconstructive memory

  Reconstructive memory involves interpreting what is seen or heard and reconstructing them into memories when required. But this recall can be distorted in two ways: our expectations of what we anticipate what would've happened and post-event information, such as how we are asked to recall information.
• Background: outline the problems with eye witness testimony

  All of this is important to know when we consider eye witness testimony, as the memory of an event can be easily influenced/disorted and therefore eye witnesses can be unreliable, yet juries are often convinced by an eye witness testimony.
• Background: how this inspired Loftus and Palmer

  This lead Loftus and Palmer to investigate how reliable they are, and how an individual's memory/ability to accurately remember events can be impacted by leading questions.
• More on Bartlett (1932)

  was the first to suggest memory is a reconstructive process - what we remember at one time is not always what we recall

  suggested that knowledge is stored in memory as a set of schemas - simplified, generalised mental representations of everything an individual understands by a given type of object or event based on their experiences
• Aim

  to investigate the effects of leading questions on an individual's ability to accurately recall events
• Research Method

  there were 2 studies within the experiment. both were lab experiments using an independent measures design and were conducted in highly controlled environments
• Experiment 1: IV + DV

  IV = the wording of the critical question hidden in the questionnaire - This question asked: "About how fast were the cars going when they hit/smashed/collided/contacted/bumped each other"

  DV = the estimated speed in mph given by the participant
• Experiment 1: sample

  45 of Loftus' students

  from Washington University

  were divided into 5 groups (one for each verb)

  with 9 Ps in each group
• Experiment 1: procedure

  • all Ps were shown the same 7 film clips (standardised) of different traffic accidents originally made as part of a driver safety film
  • after each clip Ps were given a questionnaire which asked them firstly to describe the accident (qualitative) then answer a series of questions about the accident
  • there was 1 critical question in the questionnaire: "About how fast were the cars going when they ... each other?"

  9 different Ps were placed in each condition. the 5 conditions were:

  
• Experiment 1: results

  'smashed' produced the fastest speed estimate and 'contacted' the lowest

  
• Experiment 1: conclusions

  
• Why was a second study conducted?

  
• Experiment 2: sample

  150 different students (controls DCs/SDB, not using same people again)

  from Washington University

  divided into 3 groups

  with 50 Ps in each group
• Experiment 2: procedure

  • all Ps were shown a one-minute film which contained a 4-second multiple car crash
  • they were then given a questionnaire which asked them to describe the accident + answer a set of Qs about the incident
  • there was a critical question about speed. The IV was the wording of the question:

  -50 Ps were asked "About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other"

  -50 Ps were asked "About how fast were the cars going when they hit into each other"

  -50 Ps weren't asked a question about vehicular speed (control group)

  • one week ;after all Ps w/o seeing the film again completed another questionnaire about the accident which contained a further critical Q: "Did you see any broken glass - Yes/No?". DV = whether the answer to this question was yes or no
• Experiment 2: more on the procedure

  in actual fact there was no broken glass shown in the film. but since broken glass is associated with car accidents occurring at high speed it was expected the Ps who had been asked the "smashed" question might often say 'yes' to the critical question because the impact of the accident is apparently gentler for hit than for smashed
• Experiment 2: results

  
• Experiment 2: conclusions

  
• Experiment 2: overall conclusions

  • memories are constructed from 2 sources of information - what we actually perceive as happening at the time and the information which is later received and incorporated into our memories. information from the 2 sources will integrate overtime + we will be unable to decipher which source the information comes from. we are there4 unable to tell whether our memory is accurate
  • there4 overall its safe to say that eyewitness accounts of events may not be reliable sources of information, especially when leading questions are used
• Controls

  • critical Q was hidden among others = reduces DCs
  • all Ps watched the same 7 clips
  • used diff students in E2 than E1 = controls for DCs, not using same people again
• Type of data

  if asked what type of data was collected = qualitative + quantitative

  if asked about results = quantitative
• Explain how Loftus and Palmer use the lab experimental method (2)

  Loftus and Palmer's study into reconstruction of memory was a lab experiment as they used a highly controlled, artificial setting (a laboratory at Washington University) and the manipulated the independent variable (they type of verb - either 'smashed', 'hit', 'collided', 'contacted' or 'bumped' - used in the critical Q: about how fast were the cars going when they...into each other?)
• What is the IV and DV

  The independent variable was the wording/verb used in the critical Q: "about how fast were the cars going when they smashed/hit/collided/contacted/ bumped into each other?" and the dependent variable was the Ps estimations of the cars speeds in mph
• What was the purpose of the second experiment

  further research to find out which of the 2 different possible explanations for the findings in E1 are correct: response bias in which the Ps were unsure what speed cars were travelling so guessed based on verb in Q or actual changes in memory due to the verb used in Q
• Strengths and weaknesses of sample

  +use different students in E2

  +used a larger sample in E2

  -only used psychology students, more likely to catch onto aim OR students may have higher IQ so memory less likely to be reconstructed/disorted

  -students so don't have much driving experience

  -likely to all be a similar age

  -ethnocentric?
• Strength of quantitative data

  P = quantitative data is data that's in numerical or statistical form so its easier to make comparisons

  E = collected speed estimates on vehicular speed in mph based on verb used in Q and found that "smashed" produced highest speed estimate of 40.5 and "contacted" the lowest of 31.8. numerical so comparisons can be made more easily if future research is conducted into memory reconstruction

  C = high external reliability so can check consistency of results into memory reconstruction
• Link to approach question

  
• Link to theme Q for E1

  
• Link to key theme Q for E2

  
• What debates do Loftus + Palmer link to

  • determinism = Ps estimations of vehicular speed are pre-determined by the wording of the critical Q
  • scientific = manipulation of IV (verb used in critical Q) allows for establishment of C+E