1- Cognitive psych

Cognitive Psych

-Key theme 1: Memory

-Key theme 2: Attention

Assumptions:

• The mind works like a computer- info is inout, stored and retrieved
• Primarily concerned with investigating behaviour in relation to the internal mental processes like thinking, problem solving and memory

+= Tends to use well controlled lab expts-scientific, applications in real world e.g. L+P brought into question the reliability of EWT.

-= Reductionist-narrow focus on mental processes doesn't automatically take account of individual, social or bio factors, often lacks eco v due to reliance on lab expts- hard to generalise.

Loftus and Palmer (1974)

-Background:

• Reconstructive memory= often our memories are flawed we automatically, unconsciously fill in memory gaps using stereotypes and expectations from our mental schemas, this produces distorted memories
• Eyewitness testimony= a form of evidence used in court systems. It relies heavily on the memory of the eyewitness 

-Aim:

• To investigate how info provided to a witness after an event will influence their memory of that event. 

-Design:

• 2 lab expts, IMD
• IV= verb used
• DV= the estimate of speed or whether the p saw glass

-Sample:

• 1= 45 students from Washington uni
• 2= 150 students from Washington uni 
• Opp sample

-Procedure Expt 1:

• Ps shown 7 video clips of car crashes
• They were split into 5 groups, 9 Ps in each
• All ps asked ''about how fast were the cars going when they ____ each other''
• Each group given diff ver (smashed, collided, bumped, hit or contacted)

-Procedure Expt 2:

• Ps shown short film that showed a multi-vehicle car accidnet and asked qs about it. 
• Split into 3 groups (50 ps in each)
• One group asked ''how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?''
• One group asked ''how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?''
• One group not asked about speed
• Week later all ps returned and asked ''Did you see any broken glass?''- there was no broken glass in the video. 

-Results:

• Smashed- mean estimate of speed (mph)= 40.8
• Collidied= 39.3
• Bumped= 38.1
• Hit= 34.0
• Contacted= 31.8
• Broken glass 'smashed'= 16 Yes, 34 No
• Broken glass 'hit'= 7 Yes, 43 No
• Broken glass control= 6 Yes, 44 No

-Conclusions:

• The way in which questions about events are worded can affect the way in which those events are remembered
• Findings from expt 2 strongly suggest that this is not simply due to bias (response bias) instead it seems that post-event questions actually become part of the memory for that event= wording of questions can distort event memory
• Reconstructive hypothesis= 2 types on info go into a person's memory; their own perception of the event and post-event info. 

-Internal v

• += less DC (IMD) no order effects, lab conditions= extraneous variables controlled, some films were of real accidents, filler questions
• -= ps knew they were in an expt so may have tried guessing aim and think they were 'supposed' to remember broken glass so did to fit experimentors expectations

-Eco v

• Low= lab conditions, ps knew they were taking part
• …