describe findings + conclusions of Loftus&Palmer (10)

• Findings

  • P: loftus and palmer found that the wording of a question can significantly influence participants’ memory of an event.

  • E: in experiment 1, participants who were asked “how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?” gave higher speed estimates (mean = 40.8 mph) than those who were asked with milder verbs like hit (mean = 34.0 mph) or contacted (mean = 31.8 mph). In experiment 2, participants in the smashed condition were also more than twice as likely to falsely report seeing broken glass a week later (16 participants) compared to those in the hit (7 participants) or control group (6 participants).

  • E: these findings show that subtle diffs in language dont only affect immediate estimates but alter long-term memory recall, suggests distortion of memory rather than just response bias.

  • L: demonstrates powerful influence leading questions can have on eyewitness testimony, with real legal implications
• conclusions

  • P: loftus and palmer concluded that leading questions can distort memory by altering the actual memory trace of witnessed event.

  • E: they proposed two possible explanations: one being response-bias (where participants adjust their answers based on the verb used), and the other, more critical, being memory distortion, where word used reshapes participant‘s recollection of event.

  • E: evidence from experiment 2 supports memory distortion explanation - participants in smashed group not only estimated higher speeds but also more likely to remember seeing broken glass that wasn’t there. Implies verb led them to form a new, inaccurate memory.

  • L: therefore, study suggests memory is reconstructive and highly susceptible to external influence, such as misleading post-event info, undermines reliability of eyewitness accounts.