Loftus and Palmer 1974
Loftus and Palmer 1974
This study was conducted to determine whether memory could be distorted by other information, which occurs after the event. The idea of the study was to see if any information they supplied influenced the witness’s memory information they had for the event.
The study was conducted in a lab in which had 45 participants that were students at university. In order to simulate a real car crash the students watched a video of one happening. After they had seen it they were separated into 5 groups that were asked the same question on the estimated speed of the cars crashing but with a different verb (contacted, hit, smashed, bumped and collided). The results showed that those who were asked the speed of the cars that ‘smashed’ had an average of about 40.8mph whilst those with the verb ‘contacted’ averaged around 31.8mph. This clearly shows that the verb has had a significant influence on their perception of the event. They figured that this response could be due to either two things. One being distortion where a memory is changed meaning that is not the exact event that a person recalls. Or it could be down to response-bias, which is where a word influences you because you are unsure of the answer, and so the word ‘suggested’ a speed that is realistic to the true answer to the question.
Loftus and Palmer also conducted another experiment with 150 students who were shown another video of a car crash, which involved no broken glass. Just like in experiment 1 they asked the participants to give the speed that the cars were travelling at. However this time they only used 2 verbs, which were ‘smashed’ and ‘hit’, and a control group that were asked the question without the verb. They were then asked if they saw the broken glass, only 12% of the control group said they saw it with an increase to 14% for the group with the verb of ‘hit’. Contrasting with the ‘smashed’ group in which 32% said that they saw the broken glass. This is a clear sign that
This study was conducted to determine whether memory could be distorted by other information, which occurs after the event. The idea of the study was to see if any information they supplied influenced the witness’s memory information they had for the event.
The study was conducted in a lab in which had 45 participants that were students at university. In order to simulate a real car crash the students watched a video of one happening. After they had seen it they were separated into 5 groups that were asked the same question on the estimated speed of the cars crashing but with a different verb (contacted, hit, smashed, bumped and collided). The results showed that those who were asked the speed of the cars that ‘smashed’ had an average of about 40.8mph whilst those with the verb ‘contacted’ averaged around 31.8mph. This clearly shows that the verb has had a significant influence on their perception of the event. They figured that this response could be due to either two things. One being distortion where a memory is changed meaning that is not the exact event that a person recalls. Or it could be down to response-bias, which is where a word influences you because you are unsure of the answer, and so the word ‘suggested’ a speed that is realistic to the true answer to the question.
Loftus and Palmer also conducted another experiment with 150 students who were shown another video of a car crash, which involved no broken glass. Just like in experiment 1 they asked the participants to give the speed that the cars were travelling at. However this time they only used 2 verbs, which were ‘smashed’ and ‘hit’, and a control group that were asked the question without the verb. They were then asked if they saw the broken glass, only 12% of the control group said they saw it with an increase to 14% for the group with the verb of ‘hit’. Contrasting with the ‘smashed’ group in which 32% said that they saw the broken glass. This is a clear sign that