To see if leading questions are likely to affect someone's memory of an event.
1 of 12
How many pt's in Procedure 1?
45, split into 5 groups of 9
2 of 12
What was the critical question?
How fast were the cars going when they........ each other?
3 of 12
After the clip a questionnaire was given to pts and the critical question had a different verb each time, what were they?
Smashed, Collided, Bumped, Hit, Contacted
4 of 12
How many pt's in Procedure 2?
150, split into 3 groups of 50
5 of 12
How long was the video clip in procedure 2 and what came next?
1 min. Pt's asked about speed of car (hit/smashed). The control group were not asked about the speed.
6 of 12
What was asked a week later in procedure 2?
Did you see any broken glass?
7 of 12
Results 1
Smashed 40.8 Contacted 31.8 9mph difference
8 of 12
Results 2
Smashed 16 Hit 7 Control 6
9 of 12
What was the conclusion?
Leading questions cause a distortion in people's memory and they should NOT be used in court/ewt. The word smashed indicates a more serious event.
10 of 12
What were the strengths of the study?
Lab experiment - clear controls, is reliable and can be tested for reliability. Good sample size of 195 in total. Watching a video of a car crash less distressing than a real one (ethical). Speed estimates - objective
11 of 12
What were the weaknesses of the study?
All pt's uni students - internal motivation. Lacks ecological validity - artifical and set up. Demand characteristics. Some pt's may have still been distressed from video.
12 of 12
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
How many pt's in Procedure 1?
Back
45, split into 5 groups of 9
Card 3
Front
What was the critical question?
Back
Card 4
Front
After the clip a questionnaire was given to pts and the critical question had a different verb each time, what were they?
Comments
No comments have yet been made