Loftus and Palmer

Question 1

strengths of M+P

Answer 1

+ demonstrates causal relationship by deliberately manipulating the IV (the verb) to see causal effect on DV (estimate of speed) to draw a causal conclusion.
+ use of lab experiment means potential confounding variables are controlled so any change in the DV is due to the IV and not other factors that could arise in field experiment

Question 2

weaknesses of M+P

Answer 2

-lacks ecological validity as participants only watched film clips of car incidents, not eliciting same emotional response as a real accident would.
- sample only made up of US college students , other age groups may be more or less prone to being affected by misleading questions. A consequence of source monitoring- an eye witness typically acquires information from watching the event itself and then subsequent suggestion. Other research has found older people may have more difficulty remembering the source of their information.

Question 3

Ethical and social

Answer 3

• lack of valid consent due to deception. if aware of aims could have caused demand characteristics so findings wouldn’t provide useful insight into EWT. So raise question of was the deception acceptable? yes- for the benefits of these research findings on society, as well as debrief at end of research
  + social implication: we know based on these findings not to rely too heavily on EWT in the cjs
  +psychological harm avoided by not having participants witness a real accident that could cause long term trauma impacts and wouldnt be solved by debriefing