Loftus and Palmer

• What was the aim of the first study?

  To investigate how information given after an event influences a witnesses memory of that event
• What was the sample in the first study?

  45 students of the University of Washington
• How many film clips were they shown in the first study?

  7 film clips of traffic accidents from safety films made for driver education, clips varied from 5 to 30 seconds long
• What were the students asked to do after each clip from the first study?

  asked to write an account of the accident they just saw. they were also asked some specific questions but the main one was to do with the speed of the vehicles involved
• What were the different conditions?

  changed one word in a question depending on the condition

  base question was “about how fast were the cars going when they … each other?”

  each condition had a different word fill in the blank:

  Smashed, collided, bumped, hit, and contacted
• What were the results of the first study?

  the phrasing of the question brought about a change in speed estimation.

  “smashed” = higher speed

  “contacted” = lower speed
• In the second study, what was the aim?

  to provide more info as to why the ppts gave different speed estimates and if the ppts memories really had been distorted by the verbal label
• What was the sample of the second study?

  150 students
• what were the ppts asked to do in the second study?

  viewed a short film that contained a 4 second scene of multiple car accidents and were then questioned about it
• What were the conditions of the second study?

  3 conditions

  first condition: ppts asked ‘how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?’

  second condition: ppts asked ‘how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?’

  third condition: ppts not interrogated about speed
• What happened 1 week after they were questioned?

  the ppts returned and answered a series of questions about the accident without seeing it again.

  main question was “did you see any broken glass?” even though there was no glass in the film
• What were the results of the second study?

  more of those who were asked ’how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?’ said there was broken glass (16 compared to 7 of the ppts in the ‘hit’ condition)
• What is a weakness of the study?

  criticise their conclusion by recognising that it is not only the type of question but also other factors that influence memory of an event such as emotions
• Why is hiding the leading question a strength of the study?

  ppts would be less likely to guess to aim of the study, reducing demand characteristics
• How are the findings of the study useful?

  police and lawyers are urged to use as few leading questions as possible

  Devlin Report recommended the trial judge to tell the jury it is not safe to convict on a single EWT