post event discussion & leading questions evaluation

• What is a weakness of studies such as Gabbert et al?

  Participants are aware that their statements have no consequences. This is a weakness as this may affect the accuracy of their answers. Foster (1994) found that people were more accurate in their answers if they thought a conviction would occur.
• What is a weakness of studies such as Loftus and Palmer (1974)?

  It supplies an artificial environment/situation/film clips. Feelings are not the same as if you witnessed a real life crime and you have less responsibility. This is a weakness as it is difficult to generalise the findings to real life.
• What is a limitation of using volunteers as participants in studies?

  Volunteers would be aware of the aims of the study and what they would have to do, would be paying a lot more attention to things happening. This is a weakness as it may not accurately reflect the recall of people who see things such as car crashes in real life, therefore they may not be able to generalise findings to explain real life situations in EWT.
• What is a strength of using lab experiments in EWT research?

  In studies such as Gabbert et al, they may have real life application when focusing on the effects of post-event discussion. This is because regardless of whether the participants believed there would be a conviction, their recall was still affected by information received from other people. This is a strength as they can apply these findings to real life to prevent police allowing post-event discussion to ensure a more accurate recall and comparison of events.