Pickel

HideShow resource information

1. What was the conclusion for the 2nd procedure?

  • The findings are essentially identical to the 1st experiment, the doughboy and knife were unusual in the context of an machine repair shop and produced the poorest level of recall.
  • The findings are essentially opposite to the 1st experiment, the doughboy and knife were unusual in the context of an electrical repair shop and produced the best level of recall.
  • The findings are essentially identical to the 1st experiment, the doughboy and knife were unusual in the context of an electrical repair shop and produced the poorest level of recall.
  • The findings are essentially identical to the 1st experiment, the sunglasses and being empty handed were unusual in the context of an electrical repair shop and produced the poorest level of recall.
1 of 20

Other questions in this quiz

2. What changed in the second procedure?

  • The man
  • The items and the location
  • The aim
  • Length of video

3. What gave the highest level of recall in the 2nd procedure?

  • Screwdriver
  • Nothing/empty
  • Knife
  • Pillsbury doughboy

4. One strength?

  • There was a lot of control over extraneous variables, this improves experimental validity and reliability
  • It was conducted in 1998
  • The researchers wanted to test threat and unusualness, but it is unlikely that participants watching a video tape felt any threat.
  • The participants conducted a filler talk

5. How was the first procedure carried out?

  • participants shown 2 minute video reconstruction of an incident in a hair salon.
  • Participants waited in a hair salon unknowingly before a man walks in and robs it
  • participants are shown a robbery of a bakery
  • participants are in a park when someone threatens a close group of people with a weapon

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Criminological and Forensic Psychology resources »