To investigate whether the vividness of evidence affects its persuasiveness
1 of 10
What was the research method of the study?
An experiment
2 of 10
What was the design of the study?
Independent measures design
3 of 10
What were the two conditions of the study?
Vivid testimony condition and pallid condition
4 of 10
What was the theory behind the study?
Presenting evidence in a way that enhances its vividness may make information more engaging and relevant, meaning the message is processed more thoroughly
5 of 10
What did the civil court case the participants were presented with involve?
An automobile-pedestrian accident
6 of 10
What was said in the vivid version?
The plaintiff was wearing blue Nike tennis shoes, pink socks and a Columbia University t-shirt
7 of 10
What was said in the pallid version?
The plaintiff had been on the zebra crossing
8 of 10
What were the results of the study?
The vivid testimony was more persuasive than the pallid testimony. This affected not only the verdict of the case but also the level of damages awarded.
9 of 10
What was the conclusion of the study?
Vividness does affect the jury's decision; if testimony is vivid it's more likely to be persuasive. The effect of the verdict was down to the vivid description adding credibility to the testimony.
Comments
No comments have yet been made