Context/Background
Study is about eyewitness testimony and reconstructed memories
A schema= a cognitive framework/concept where we organise and interpret information about people or things, this tells us what to expect from situations based on memory of information or experiences linked to it
Police and courts often rely on subjective eyewitness testimonies, which can be potentially affected by leading questions
Aim
To see if different verbs affect memory (in 2 experiments)
Method
Experiment 1- Lab experiment, independent measures, IV= wording of critical question, "How fast were the cars going when they hit/smashed/contacted/bumped/collided with each other?" DV= estimated speed
Experiment 2- Lab experiment, independent measures, IV= wording in 2 questions, either "How fast were the cars going when they smashed?" "How fast were the cars going when they hit?" and a separate question unrelated to speed
A week later, they were asked if they saw any broken glass in the clip
Procedure
Ex. 1- 45 students, 5 groups of 9, shown 7 clips of car crashes (staged), then given a questionnaire to describe the accident
Critical question= How fast were the cars going when they _____ each other?
IV's= the verbs used, hit/smashed/collided/bumped/contacted
Ex. 2- 150 students, 3 groups of 50, shown a 1 minute film of a car crash and given a questionnaire to describe it
Critical question= How fast when they smashed? How fast when they hit? and a question unrelated to speed
A week later, they were asked if they saw any broken glass (there wasn't actually any broken glass)
Findings
Ex. 1-
Verb mean speed estimate (mph)
smashed 40.5
collided 39.3
bumped 38.1
hit 34
contacted 31.8
Ex.2-
Verb mean speed (mph)
smashed 10.46
hit 8
Whether they saw broken glass
Response smashed hit contacted
yes 16 7 6
no 34 43 44
Conclusions
Wording in leading questions can affect memory = memory reconstruction
Evaluation
Research method- Lab experiment, independent measures
Data type- quant. data so easier to compare, but qual. data may have helped with understanding the research better
Ethics- minimal ethical issues but it may have upset p's affected by crashes
Validity- high control so minimal extraneous variables, low ecological validity
Reliability- highly reliable because it was standardised, so the procedure was replicable
Sample- random sampling method, all white middle class students so ethnocentric and un-generalisable, demand characteristics possible but students are not experienced at driving so speed estimates won't be as accurate