Loftus and Palmer (1974) Leading Questions and EWT

Summary

This video explores Loftus and Palmer's 1974 research on the reconstruction of memory, specifically how language influences eyewitness recollections. The study, which involved two experiments, reveals how the wording of questions, such as using verbs like 'smashed' or 'hit,' can alter memory, affecting the perceived speed of cars in a crash and even leading people to falsely recall details, like seeing broken glass. The research underscores the fallibility of memory and the significant role language plays in shaping it, offering important insights into the reliability of eyewitness testimony in legal settings.

Takeaways

• 😀 Loftus & Palmer's 1974 study focuses on the impact of language on memory reconstruction, specifically in the context of eyewitness testimony.
• 😀 The research was influenced by Bartlett's schema theory, which suggests that memory is shaped by pre-existing knowledge and schemas.
• 😀 The study consists of two experiments designed to examine how different verbs in questions affect memory recall.
• 😀 Experiment 1 involved participants watching videos of car accidents and estimating the speed of the vehicles based on different verbs (e.g., 'smashed,' 'hit').
• 😀 The results from Experiment 1 showed that the verb used significantly impacted participants' speed estimates, with the 'smashed' group estimating the highest speed.
• 😀 In Experiment 2, participants were asked whether they saw broken glass after watching a video of a crash, even though there was no glass.
• 😀 Experiment 2 found that those who were asked about a 'smashed' crash were more likely to falsely report seeing broken glass, compared to those in the 'hit' and control groups.
• 😀 Loftus & Palmer's research demonstrates that memory is reconstructive and can be influenced by external factors, like question phrasing.
• 😀 The findings highlight the potential unreliability of eyewitness testimony, as memories can be altered by the wording of questions asked during interviews.
• 😀 The research has important implications for the legal system, emphasizing the need for careful question phrasing to avoid contaminating eyewitness memory.

Q & A

What is the main focus of Loftus and Palmer's 1974 research?

The main focus of their research is on the reconstructive nature of memory and how language, particularly the use of different verbs, can influence eyewitness testimony and the recollection of events, such as the speed of cars in a car crash.

How does the research relate to earlier work by Bartlett?

Loftus and Palmer's work is influenced by Bartlett's research on schemas and memory. Bartlett proposed that schemas, or pre-existing knowledge structures, shape how we process and recall information, which laid the groundwork for investigating how language affects memory.

What was the main hypothesis tested in Loftus and Palmer's study?

The main hypothesis was that the way a question is phrased, particularly the verb used, would influence people's memory and estimation of the speed of cars in a car crash.

What was the methodology used in Experiment 1?

In Experiment 1, 45 participants watched seven videos of car accidents, ranging from 5 to 30 seconds in length. After each video, they were asked general questions about the accident and a critical question about the speed of the cars, using one of five different verbs: smashed, collided, bumped, hit, or contacted.

What were the key findings in Experiment 1?

The results showed that participants who heard the verb 'smashed' estimated the cars were traveling faster (40.8 mph) than those who heard 'contacted' (31.8 mph), demonstrating that the verb used in the question influenced participants' speed estimates.

What was the key difference in Experiment 2 compared to Experiment 1?

In Experiment 2, a larger sample size (150 participants) was used, and participants only watched one video. Additionally, the critical question was asked a week later about whether they saw broken glass in the video, which was not present, in order to test the effect of the verb on memory recall over time.

What were the results of Experiment 2?

The results showed that those in the 'smashed' condition were more likely to report seeing broken glass (16 out of 50), compared to those in the 'hit' condition (7 out of 50) and the control group (6 out of 50), even though no glass was present, demonstrating the effect of leading questions on memory.

Why were the verbs used ('smashed', 'collided', 'bumped', etc.) important in the research?

The different verbs were important because they acted as independent variables, influencing how participants estimated the speed of the cars and potentially altering their memory of the event. The verbs varied in intensity, with 'smashed' implying more force than 'contacted,' which had a direct impact on participants' recollection.

What implications does this research have for eyewitness testimony?

This research highlights that eyewitness testimony can be unreliable due to the influence of language and leading questions. The way questions are phrased in legal settings could distort memory and lead to inaccurate recollections, affecting the outcome of trials.

What is the significance of the findings from Loftus and Palmer's study?

The significance of the study is that it demonstrated the malleable nature of memory, showing that people's recollections of events can be altered by the language used in questioning. This has major implications for the reliability of eyewitness testimony, particularly in legal contexts, where memory distortion can influence verdicts.