To examine the effects of weapon focus on EWT when the unusualness and threat of the object changes
2 of 21
How many procedures did pickel conduct in the study?
2
3 of 21
How was the first procedure carried out?
participants shown 2 minute video reconstruction of an incident in a hair salon.
4 of 21
What do the participants see during the first video?
The exterior, interior, female receptionist behind a desk, a man approaching her, she handed him money and he left and get in the passenger of a waiting car which then left.
5 of 21
What were the 5 objects the man came in with?
Scissors, Hand gun, Wallet, Chicken and Nothing
6 of 21
What had the poorest recall?
Chicken
7 of 21
What item gave the best recall?
Wallet
8 of 21
Why was there a second procedure?
Done to check the validity of the first experiment
9 of 21
What changed in the second procedure?
The items and the location
10 of 21
How was recall measured/collected?
Filled out a questionnaire requiring them to remember details about the receptionist and the man, what he was holding and what they thought he was doing in the salon.
11 of 21
What were the items the man had in the second procedure?
Knife, Screwdriver, Sunglass, doughboy, nothing
12 of 21
What gave the lowest recall in the second procedure?
Knife
13 of 21
What gave the highest level of recall in the 2nd procedure?
Nothing/empty
14 of 21
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 electrical repair shop and produced the poorest level of recall.
15 of 21
What was the conclusion for the 1st procedure?
The handgun and raw chicken resulted in the lowest recall, while the scissors and wallet had less of an effect. It can be deduced that the poor recall was caused by high unusualness
16 of 21
One strength?
There was a lot of control over extraneous variables, this improves experimental validity and reliability
17 of 21
One weakness?
Real witnesses would not see the crime on a video recording, they would have been in the situation itself, this means that distractions and emotions that would have been present in real life and could have affected recall were not available to the pa
18 of 21
What was the IV for the experiment
The item the man held and the level of unusualness/threat
19 of 21
The DV?
The level of recall in each scenario, depending on the item the man held being threatening or unusual
20 of 21
An application of this study is?
Has highlighted the need for the courts/police to be aware of the effects of weapon focus
21 of 21
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
What was the aim?
Back
To examine the effects of weapon focus on EWT when the unusualness and threat of the object changes
Card 3
Front
How many procedures did pickel conduct in the study?
Back
Card 4
Front
How was the first procedure carried out?
Back
Card 5
Front
What do the participants see during the first video?
Comments
No comments have yet been made