Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Loftus and Palmer- Evaluation - Coggle Diagram
Loftus and Palmer- Evaluation
Ethics
Protection: Car crash safety films which don't contain gruesome images
Deception- Participants unaware study about effect of leading questions on memory, they believed they were doing an experiment on memory
Deception- necessary to see true aim and avoid demand characteristics
Research Method
Lab Experiment- controlled and easy to replicate procedure i.e. same questions, same 7 clips
Fits Scientific criteria: control, evidence, theory, replication
Lab Experiment- lacks ecological validity of results in real life when witnessing a car crash it's much more traumatic so memory may react differently due to stress so remember less
Data
Quantitative data: obtained through speed estimates the car was travelling, can be compared between verb conditions to see effect of language on memory in form of speed
No qualitative data so don't have any understanding to why the speed estimates were chosen/ why glass recalled seen
Validity
Standardized- same set of questions and same 7 clips so can be easily repeated improving validity and reliability of results
Aware being studied- But aware being studied so may try to guess aim and present demand characteristics i.e. don't remember seeing smashed glass but when asked about it say they do as feel like they should've seen it
Highly controlled lab experiment- improves internal validity, control over extraneous variables such as order effects of questions by varying
Ecological Validity
Low- controlled lab experiment watching video clips of crashes they were pre-warned about not witnessing real life events so memory may respond differently doesn't have same emotional factors making memory remember more/ less. In stressful circumstances memories may be stored, recalled or encoded differently.
Reliability-
Highly controlled lab experiment- standardised same set of questions and same 7 clips so can be easily repeated shown by experiment 1 procedure being repeated 45x and experiment 2 150x improving reliability of results
Results show memory can be distorted by information told to you about something i.e. smashed glass question caused ppts to believe they remembered seeing smashed glass was was none
Quantitative Data- objective and requires no analysis of results making more reliable
Sample-
All Uni students of same age- same occupation, same intelligence level, same backgrounds and not representative of other groups or ages
Don't know variables about population i.e. those who have driven a car may have more accurate speed estimates making results unreliable
All students- regularly remembering and being tested on information as part of their study therefore may have better memory so results can't be generalised
Ethnocentrism
Not- assumes everyone has the same brain and memory
Not- Findings only portray Uni students, cognitive processes may differ in other groups. BUT memory depends on physiognomy of brain and is universal
America- conducted in America, findings can't be applied to other cultures