Loftus and Palmer (1974) (Cognitive)

Question 1

What experimental design was used?

Answer 1

independent groups

Question 2

How many participants were in each experiment?

Answer 2

1 - 45
2 - 150

Question 3

What was the procedure for experiement 1?

Answer 3

Shown 7 different videos of traffic accidents
Then recieved a questionnaire with one critical question, “how fast were the cars going when they ___ each other?” . The verb used in the question varied for each group (5 groups) hit/smashed/collided/bumped/contacted.
The participants also had to give an estimate of speed

Question 4

What were the procedures for experiment 2?

Answer 4

Shown a video of a multiple car crash. Then asked a set of questions involving the critical question about speed.
They were in 3 groups and had the words smashed/hit and one was a control who had no questions.
They were then asked to return and were asked further questions ; did you see broken glass?

Question 5

What were the findings for experiment 1?

Answer 5

The group given the word smashed estimated a higher speed than the other groups - contacted was the lowest

Question 6

What were the findings for experiment 2?

Answer 6

Part 1 - Participants gave higher speed estimates in the smashed condition
Part 2 - The people in the smashed condition were more than twice as likely to report seeing broken glass , the control was the least

Question 7

What were the main conclusions?

Answer 7

1) Different speed estimates occur due to the critical word or biases a persons response
2) The critical word changes a persons memore so that their perception of the accident is affected

Question 8

What strengths are there to the experiment?

Answer 8

Controlled experiment - able to demonstrate a casual relationship and potentially CVs are controlled

Question 9

What are the weaknesses of this study?

Answer 9

Ecological validity - Watched videos which is not the same as witnessing real ones (lacks ecological validity)
The sample - All US college students - other groups of people may be more / less prone to being affected by misleading information

Question 10

What was the ethical issue of this experiement?

Answer 10

Lack of valid consent, did not gain valid consent or the participants would have been aware of the aims