Contradicting research, Christianson and Hubbinette, low ecological validity
1 of 15
Strength of Anxiety and EWT
Supporting research, Loftus and Burns, reliable
2 of 15
What % correctly identified may holding greasy pen?
49%
3 of 15
What % correctly identified may holding paper knife?
33%
4 of 15
Who conducted research into Anxiety and EWT
Loftus
5 of 15
Who conducted research into Age and EWT?
Poole and Lindsay
6 of 15
What age were the participants in Poole and Linsday's study?
3-8 years
7 of 15
Briefly describe procedure of Poole and Lindsay's study
children shown science demonstration, then parents read them more info on science demonstration, asked to think where they got info from
8 of 15
Poole and Lindsay findings/conclusion
younger children found it hard to recall where info was from, poor EWT, older children could recall where info from, better EWT
9 of 15
Leading question?
A question that is phrased in a way that bias a respondents reply
10 of 15
Misleading info procedure
Ppts shown film of car accident- 1 group asked serious question. group 2 asked misleading question. After 1 week ppts were all asked further 10 questions, final question 'did you see a barn?'
11 of 15
Group 1 and 2 findings (Misleading info)
Group 1 - 2.7% thought there was barn. Group 2 - 17.3% thought there was barn
12 of 15
Conclusion (Misleading info)
Group 2 ppts, the non-existent barn had been added to their original memory representation.
13 of 15
Strength of Misleading info
Supporting research, loftus found accuracy in misled group didn't increase even when offered money, reliable
14 of 15
Limitation of Misleading info
Demand characteristics, artificial research, ppts may have guessed nature of research, low ecological validity
15 of 15
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Strength of Anxiety and EWT
Back
Supporting research, Loftus and Burns, reliable
Card 3
Front
What % correctly identified may holding greasy pen?
Back
Card 4
Front
What % correctly identified may holding paper knife?
Comments
No comments have yet been made