laney et al

Question 1

aims

Answer 1

• To see if false memories could be implanted in people

- To see if false memory of loving asparagus previously makes asparagus more appealing by sight

Question 2

procedure

Answer 2

Session 1

• Participants assigned to 1 of 2 groups (Love and Control group)
• Upon arrival, participants were told that their data would be entered into a computer, that would later generate a personal profile for them
• Participants then completed 5 questionnaires: FHI, Food preferences Questionnaire, Restaurant Questionnaire as well as two filler questionnaires which included personality Questionnaire and Desirability Scale
• Filler questionnaires were to distract from true aim of experiment.

Session 2

• Participants returned to the location, where they received false feedback on their performance from Session 1.
• The critical item was embedded in their “computer generated” profiles which read: “You loved asparagus the first time you ate it.”
• Participants then viewed 20 slides each of which was displayed for 30 seconds, and completed 4 ratings of each slide. The slides contained photographs of common food including the critical item Asparagus.
• The photos were rated based on their degree of appetite or disgust, and the properties of the photograph’s origins.
• Participants then completed the FHI, Food preferences questionnaire and Restaurant Questionnaire for the second time.
• Also additionally completed a memory of belief questionnaire

Question 3

sample

Answer 3

• 103 Graduates from the University of Washington
• 62% female
• Mean age 19.9

Question 4

results

Answer 4

• Results show positive false memories can be implanted in people
• The mean confidence of the love group liking asparagus increased from 1.7 to 4.2 (by 2.5 points) whilst for the control group increased from 1.45 to 2.52 ( by 1.1 points)

Question 5

conclusion

Answer 5

• Experiment showed that people can have positive false memories implanted in them which had consequences towards their liking of asparagus

Question 6

IV & DV

Answer 6

IV: - False information of false memory of liking asparagus as a child

DV: How much the participant liked asparagus

Question 7

control variables

Answer 7

Procedure/method and lab environment

Question 8

method

Answer 8

• Self report (Questionnaires)

- Lab experiment

Question 9

strengths

Answer 9

• Very replicable due to standardized procedure, meaning investigation can be repeated for higher reliability
• Quantitative data is objective and unbiased, hence the high validity of the experiment

Question 10

weaknesses

Answer 10

• Lab environment and questionnaire is not representative of real life, hence low ecological validity
• Not generalizable as participants were all from same university and mostly female (gynocentric but not that much at 62%)

Question 11

ethics

Answer 11

Participants deceived about aims of experiment as well as their food preferences which is manipulation

• Participants were not debriefed
• Uninformed consent