What was the main aim of Loftus and Palmer's 1974 study?
To investigate how the phrasing of questions affects participants' estimation of vehicle speed in a car accident.
Follow-up: Participants exposed to the word "smashed" were more likely to falsely recall seeing broken glass.
Core Conclusion: Loftus and Palmer concluded that memory is reconstructive and susceptible to post-event information. Leading questions can alter a witness’s memory, affecting accuracy of testimony. This is crucial for legal contexts.
What was the main aim of Loftus and Palmer's 1974 study?
To investigate how the phrasing of questions affects participants' estimation of vehicle speed in a car accident.
What research method was used in the study?
A laboratory experiment.
What independent variable did Loftus and Palmer manipulate?
The verb used in the question (e.g., "smashed," "collided," "bumped," "hit," or "contacted").
How many participants were in the study?
45 American university students.
What was the design of the study?
Independent groups design.
What materials were used in the experiment?
Seven short film clips of car accidents and a questionnaire with a critical question about estimated speed.
What was the follow-up test conducted a week later?
Participants were asked if they saw broken glass, which was not present, to test for memory distortion.
Which verb led to the highest speed estimates?
'Smashed.'
What conclusion did Loftus and Palmer draw about memory?
Memory is reconstructive and susceptible to being altered by leading questions.
Why is this study important for legal contexts?
It shows how eyewitness testimony can be influenced and potentially inaccurate due to question wording.