The loftus and palmer eye witness testimony of 1974

1
The loftus and palmer eye witness testimony of
1974
By Dhina, Haneen, Viveka, and Natsuki
Elizabeth Loftus
2
The Theory

• Memory can not be fixed.
• But it can be altered or changed depending on the
  person.
• Also by the questions asked.

3
The Hypothesis

• If a persons memory can be reconstructed due to
  manipulations, how does this influence an
  eyewitness testimony.
• To be able to observe the effect of questions
  asked in an Eye Witness Testimony.

4
The Research Design

• By getting a group of people to watch an auto
  accident.
• Then asking them questions about what they saw.
• Changing their questions to see if this will
  effect their memory.

5
The Procedure

• Experiment 1
• 45 participants were shown films of traffic
  accidents.
• (http//www.youtube.com/watch?vUrcl0gD6YWIfeatur
  erelated )
• They were asked a series of questions about it.
• Key Question
• About how fast were the cars going when they HIT
  each other?
• ? SMASHED, COLLIDED, BUMPED CONTACTED.

6
The Procedure

• Experiment 2
• 150 students were shown the film of traffic
  accident.
• They were then divided into 3 groups
• one week later they were asked series of
  questions.
• (using same method of Experiment 1)
• Key Question
• Did you see any broken glass?
• Yes or No?

7
The Results

• The speed estimates for the verbs
• Did you see any broken glass?
• These results show a significant effect of the
  verb in the question on the memory of the film.

Smashed Collided Bumped Hit Contacted
41 39 38 34 32
Response Smashed Hit Control
Yes 16 7 6
No 34 43 44
8
Ethical Issues

• An ethical problem with the experiment is that
• 1. None of them knew they were being experimented
  upon.
• 2. They were also unaware that there would be a
  trick or false question in the inquiry.

9
Ecological Validity

• The Eyewitness testimony lacks ecological
  validity for several reasons
• A. Restricted samples (university students).
• B. False footage
• C. The participants were not personally involved
  in the case and hadnt witnessed the accident
  first hand, as they would have if they were real
  eye witnesses.
• D. The participants were not experienced drivers
  and so were less likely to be able to judge the
  correct speed of the car.
• E. Possibility for Observer bias.
• F. Restricted Age
• G. Witnesses are more likely to be more accurate
  with their sub-sequent recall of an event if they
  believe their testimony will be used in an actual
  trial (Foster et Al (1994)).

10
Evaluation

• Strengths
• -Classic Study
• -A controlled experiment
• -Reliability
• -Has realistic implications
• Weaknesses
• -Lacks ecological validity
• -Ethics
• -Students were used, not a representative sample

11
Could the study be carried out today?

• The study could still be carried today.
• Simple enough to do.
• Might be able to improve the results.
• Could do some parts differently to make better.

12
Classic Study?

• This is considered as a classic study because
• Became famous.
• Still used as examples. 'still used by police
• it Discovered a new theories.
• Gave new and relevant information about the human
  memory.

13
Bibliography

• http//onlineclassroom.tv/files/series/psychology/
  understanding_psychology/classic_studies_in_psycho
  logy_1/document4/Loftus20on20Eyewitness20Testim
  ony.ppt
•  
• http//www.holah.co.uk/study/loftus/
• http//www.thegrangeschool.net/blogs/psychology/fi
  les/2009/09/AS_AQA_memory_ewtfactors.ppt
• http//www.youtube.com/watch?vUrcl0gD6YWIfeature
  related