• Like
  • Save
Resourcd File
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
Uploaded on


More in: Technology , Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. PSYA1: Cognitive Psychology Memory Eye Witness Testimony Miss Russell
  • 2. Watch the clip of a American Psychology Demonstration and play along. Does this support or challenge Loftus’ research? Demonstration
  • 3. Thinking Ladder… To & strengths and weaknesses of research into misleading information & EWT. To how Loftus’ research differs to EWT in real life. To fully Loftus’ research into the effect of misleading info on EWT.
  • 4. How will I know if I am learning? By the end of the lesson… E Will be able to identify strengths and weaknesses of Loftus’ research. C Will be able to explain using Yuille and Cutshall’s study, how Loftus’ research is different to EWT in real life. A Will be able to fully evaluate Loftus’ research into the effect of misleading information on EWT.
  • 5. Loftus is one of the most famous Psychologists to study EWT. Imagine she had a Facebook which she used to post updates about her experiments to her friends…. Finish off her profile with three status updates or posts about the three experiments we studied last lesson. Be as creative as you like but try to include one piece of information about the aim, method, results or conclusion in each post.
  • 6. What do all three pieces of Loftus’ research have in common, which isn’t present in real EWT?
  • 7. In your groups, discuss the following points: • How realistic were the studies? (Think about the differences between the tasks the participants did, and real life situations where you need to remember what you have seen) • Who were the participants? (Could the results be generalised to other people?) • How useful was the research? (How can the results of the study be applied to other situations?) • Any other issues (Think about the type of tasks, the content of the video, etc) How valid is Loftus’ research?
  • 8.  The participants were all students  There are several ways in which students might not be representative of the general population.  These may include age, driving experience, educational experience – (i.e. they may be used to paying attention and being tested?)
  • 9. • This study has many applications: # Police questioning witnesses # Teachers asking/setting questions
  • 10. • How easy is it to estimate speed? It may be easier for some groups than others, e.g. taxi drivers or police officers. • The driver of the car is not mentioned in the article – what if they had been visible as an elderly woman or a young man? • What if the car had been a Porsche or a Smart Car?
  • 11. What is Validity? When a study measures what it set out to measure Did Loftus’ research measure what it set out to? Think back to our re-creation of our study last lesson… If you were witnessing a car crash in real life, how would this affect your memory of the event? Why? Now read Yuille and Cutshall’s (1986) research on page 33. How could this be used for evaluation?
  • 12.  This was low because it was a laboratory study, and the participants knew they were taking part in an experiment.  In real-life situations there would be an element of surprise, so you might not be paying attention.  There would be an increase in emotion – such as fear, shock, etc. There may be victims.  You might not be asked questions until some time later.  You may have the opportunity to discuss what you saw with other people
  • 13.      Replicated the stop/yield study (experiment 3). During Loftus’ original study, participants were presented with slides to recognise in a random order (out of sequence to what they originally saw). Bekerian & Bowers presented them in the original order. Correct recognition was the same for the consistent and inconsistent groups. This suggests that misleading information might affect the retrieval of memories rather than distort them in storage.
  • 14. 1 e) Describe at least one other research study into misleading information. In your answer you should include details of what participants were asked to do and what results were found. (6 marks) In a car accident, participants were asked to give the speed of the cars before the accident. A video was shown to participants, and there were special questions about the speed of the car, such as: how fast was the car was going before the accident? However the word accident was changed to bumped, collided, hit and smashed. The results found that these participants who had the word bumped suggested the least speed, whereas the participants with smashed suggested the highest speed. This could be because, the word smashed leads that the speed was fast. Whereas collided suggest a slow speed therefore it leads to a specific answer rather than actual answer from participants. 4/6 = marks C: How answer awarded and How many Grade was this could it be improved? why?
  • 15. Outline and evaluate research into the effects of misleading information on eye witness testimony. (12 marks)