Select a study conducted by Elizabeth Loftus on her online site: http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/ Read the study and state the:
1. Hypothesis
2. Independent Variable
3. Dependent Variable
4. Describe the procedure (Methods of research)
5. Discuss whether you think this study can be generalized to the larger society? Is this study valid and reliable?
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/AmerPsychAward+ArticlePDF03%20(2).pdf - "Hit" vs "Smashed" study
ReplyDeleteHypothesis-if the subject is given a more specific synonym for the same verb, then the memory will be recalled differently (Hit=no broken glass=correct; smashed=broken glass=incorrect)
IV-word used (hit, smashed, collided, etc.)
DV-perceentage of people misremembering information (recalling seeing broken glass when there was none)
Procedure-first, people were shown a video of a car accident. Next, half of the participants receive misleading information about the accident, whereas the other half receive no misinformation. Finally, all of the participants try to remember the original accident.
Generalizable-Yes. This study was largely unbiased and put in an environment suiting the real-world scenario (a controlled room like a police station office) and the results will apply to investigators trying to bring back memories of an event as vividly as possible. This study is valid and reliable.
Let the record show, this chick is seriously creepy lookin.
ReplyDelete1.) Hypothesis
If the person watching the video, or 'witness,' is given a different variation of a verb, then the incident would not be remembered the same way. For example, if the word "smashed" was used, it would leads the 'witness' to the false memory of broken glass, as opposed to the word "hit".
2.) Independent Variable
Using the different verb. For example, "How fast were the cars going when they SMASHED into each other?" and "How fast were the cars going when they HIT each other?"
3.) Dependent Variable
Whether or not subjects will have the false memory of broken glass.
4.) Methods of research
First, subjects watched the same video of a car crash, then, 1/2 these people are left alone and the other 1/2 are confused by the different verb. Then everybody has to recall what happened during the video.
5.) Generalizable, Valid, and Reliable
I think this study is all three of the above. I know I can be easily fooled (and so can Higgins.) If someone led me to believe something that I didn't have a good memory of or someone was trying to help me fill in holes, I would listen to them.
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/AmerPsychAward+ArticlePDF03%20(2).pdf
I just realized I did the same one as Jon. But I am too lazy to go back and do a different one, which is why I picked the first one in the first place. So deal with it!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSydney needs to stop stealing people's work. *cough* ACADEMIC DISHONESTY! *cough*
ReplyDeletePlanting False Memories
ReplyDeleteHypothesis: If the participants were given a story by their family members that they were lost in the mall when they were younger, then the participants re more likely to believe and "remember" that inccident.
Independent Variable: The description of the story told to the participants.
Dependent Variable: Whether or not the participant believed the story or not.
Methods of Research: Participants were given a story, that, when thy were young, they were lost in the mall. That they were highly upset and finally rescued by an elderly person and reunited with their family. One of the participants were given the story by their family members and relatives, however, one story was a fake story and had not occured.
Generalizable, Reliable or Valid?: I think that, overall, that this study is reliable. Though the study lacked information on whether the participants were by themselves or in a group or were in a laboratory setting or not, the fact that the participants were told the stories by their family member made it generalizable.
Hypothesis:If the ad is part of the reconstruction process, the ad elements or images may be likely to appear as part of consumers’reconstructed memory of their visit, regardless of whether or not the events had actually happened.
ReplyDeleteIndependent Variable:The type of poster/advertisement they received (Disney vs non-disney)
Dependent Variable: what they rate it all by taking the tests.
Methods of Research: On the first week
participants were given a list of 20 childhood events and asked to indicate whether or not the events had happened to them under the age of 10. A main question was have you shaken hands and met their favorite TV character at a theme resort. Half the participants received the Disney ad, the other half received a control, non-Disney ad. The participants were randomly assigned to one of these conditions. After a distraction, they were asked to take it again to see if their previous memories were altered by the advertisement.
Generalized, valid, reliable:
I think this is a valid study, however, since it has only been done once, i think it should be repeated a few times before being proven reliable. I think this could be generalized to the community, because when it comes to advertising and Disney, a majority of people have been to Disney at one point in their life, primarily when they are younger, which would therefore influence their thought process and memories when shown this advertisement.
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/BraunPsychMarket02.pdf
ReplyDeleteHypothesis: If people are shown an ad suggesting themselves shaking hands with mickey mouse at disney world, they are confident that this experience did exist for them.
Ind Variable: The ad
Depend Variable: The confidence in sharing the experience.
Procedure: A group of people were shown an ad suggesting they had personally shaken hands with mickey mouse at a disney park. The ad had caused the participants to be very confident in believing that experience happened. a second experiment was done instead using bugs bunny (an impossible character to be seen in disney) yet the participants believed they had that false experience. because of the emotional and memorable relation to the ad, the participants can create false memories.
yes, this experiment can be generalized using different situations or locations instead of disney land or mickey mouse.
this experiment is valid and reliable in that it supports the creation of false memories through emotional stimulation.
Sup IB Goon Squad?
ReplyDelete"Creating False Memories"
1. Hypothesis: misinformation can change an individual's recollection in predictable and sometimes very powerful ways
2. Independent Variable: scenario of "lost in the mall"
3. Dependent Variable: other scenarios that actually happened to them
4. Describe the procedure (Methods of research)
24 individuals ranging in age from 18 to 53 were to try to remember childhood events that had been recounted to the researchers by a parent, an older sibling or another close relative. They prepared a booklet for each participant containing one-paragraph stories about three events that had actually happened to him or her and one that had not. They constructed the false event using information about a possible shopping trip provided by a relative, who also verified that the participant had not in fact been lost at about the age of five. The lost-in-the-mall scenario included the following elements: lost for an extended period, crying, aid and comfort by an elderly woman and, finally, reunion with the family.
5. Discuss whether you think this study can be generalized to the larger society? Is this study valid and reliable?
Yes, the researchers were able to cause the subjects to recall an event that never happened and put enough detail into it that it sounded as if it were true. This study is valid and reliable because there was a large group of people used to test it. This experiment supports the ability to cause people to remember something that never happened
I chose her study: “Imagination and… power”
ReplyDelete1. Hypothesis
If participants are told to imagine themselves in a realistic story (that was unlikely to have occurred to them) then they are more likely to believe that the event actually happened to them because imagination plays a key role in the reconstruction of memory.
2. Independent Variable
The imagination used by the participant
3. Dependent Variable
The people used in the experiment (none of them actually experienced the story before the experiment)
4. Describe the procedure (Methods of research)
There were two groups of people, a control that was not told to imagine themselves in the story and an imaginative group that were told to involve themselves in the story. Each group was tested via internet test and laboratory conversations at regular intervals for two weeks.
5. Discuss whether you think this study can be generalized to the larger society? Is this study valid and reliable?
This study can be generalized to the larger society because, when given a certain story, imagination works similarly. Also, a specific group of people were not targeted with this study. The study is valid and reliable, for it has been replicated with similar results.
False Memories Matter:
ReplyDeletehttp://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/AmerPsychAward+ArticlePDF03%20(2).pdf
1. HYPOTHESIS: To make the participants believe that they got sick when eating pickles/eggs.
2. INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: The products used (pickles/eggs).
3. DEPENDENT VARIABLE: Wether the participants will truly believe that they got sick when they ate eggs/pickles.
4. PROCEDURE: Induced participants to believe that when they were children they got sick eating hard-boiled eggs/dill pickles. Gave them a "Party Behavior" questionaire and participants reported being less likely to eat pickles/eggs at a barbeque party.
5. RELIABILITY: Yes, because they used products that some people can get sick with so it was most likely for the participants to believe that it happened to them when they were younger.
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/AmerPsychAward+ArticlePDF03%20(2).pdf
ReplyDeleteHit vs Smashed
HP: If people were asked a question with hit or smashed in it, what percentage would say no glass breakage (hit) versus glass breakage (smashed).
IV word used e.g. hit smashed
procedure: Participants viewed a video on a car accident. They were later asked whether the two cars hit each other or smashed into each other.
Generalizable: yes there is no bias in the experiment and it is indeed ethical because no one is getting hurt or taken advantage of etc.
Hypothesis
ReplyDeleteUsing different words for a person to recall an event does affect what they think they remember. If the word “hit” is used rather than “smashed” the witness may reconstruct a memory incorrectly.
Independent Variable
The verb used to explain what happened is the independent variable. Ex: Hit or Smash
Dependent Variable
How the witness answers the question about whether there was broken glass or not.
Methods
Volunteers were shown a video of a car crash. The first half of the people is given the suggestive verb and the other half was not. After that they were ask to tell what happened.
Can it be generalized?
Yes this study can be generalized because even though it was a laboratory experiment it has conclusive results. It shows that people can be fooled by the connotations of simple verbs and this information is useful to people who must interview eyewitnesses without “contaminating” the evidence.
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/AmerPsychAward+ArticlePDF03%20%282%29.pdf
Oh and I agree that that lady is very scary looking.
ReplyDeletehttps://webfiles.uci.edu/eloftus/Zhu_PersonalityMisinfo_PAID10.pdf?uniq=eobv2r
ReplyDelete1. Hypothesis: Personality characteristics are associated with cognitive abilities and false memories induced by misinformation. People with certain types of personalities show different cognitive abilities and are more vulnerable to the misinformation effect.
2. IV: Character traits held by the subjects.
3. DV: Strengths and weaknesses of cognitive abilities.
4. Procedure: First, Chinese college students took tests on cognitive tasks and personality measures. The results of the cognitive tasks were then compared with the results of the personality measures.
5. This study can be generalized to a larger population because it studies aspects of the mind that are present in all humans around the world. It is reliable and valid because it tests all different types of people and it tests a large enough amount of people to obtain valid results.
Despite her "creepy" exterior Loftus knew what was going on... I chose her study "Loftus, Miller & Burns, 1978".
ReplyDelete1. Hypothesis: Eyewitness accounts can become obscured by leading questions or even through the use of certain words as opposed to others.
2. The words used to describe a scenario viewed by the subjects, either "stop sign" or "yeild sign", etc.
3. DV: The accurcy of the subject's recounting of the tale after a certain amount of time had passed, whether they reported the correc answer to the question.
4. Procedure: Nearly 200 subjects viewed 30 slides depicting an automobile accident. Half saw a red Datsun approaching a STOP sign; the other half saw it approach a YIELD sign. Immediately after viewing the slides half of the participants were asked: "Did another car pass the red Datsun while it was stopped at the stop sign?". For the others 'stop' was replaced by 'yield'. 20 minutes of filler activity followed, then a recognition test was performed based off of additional slides.
5. Can this study be generalized? Yes, a wide range of subjects were sampled and the topic it explored is universal to all of mankind; namely that humans can be lead to certain conclusions that are different than if they were to discover them on their own.
Remaking Memories
ReplyDeleteHypothesis: Leading questions or other forms of misinformation could contaminate the
memories of witnesses about events that they had recently experienced.
Independent Variable: Whether or not the participant is given false information.
Dependent Variable: Amount of recall of false events and information.
Procedure: People watch a simulated crime or accident. Later they are given incorrect information about the details of the event, such as the false detail that a man had curly rather than straight hair. Many of these people later claimed that they had seen a curly-haired person.
Discuss: I do think that this can be generalized to the larger society because it can encompass all race and gender. Also, I think it is reliable and valid because the study has been around for three decades and there has been many repeated experiments of this with similar results.
Advertising's Misinformation Effect
ReplyDelete-If post experience advertising alters information learned in a consumer's direct experience.
-Changes in Vocal and Verbal Information.
-How people remembered the visual and verbal information.
-People watched a commercial about a candy bar that was in the wrong wrapper. Not only was the visual information wrong. But also the man that was announcing it told the viewers about the wrong wrapper. The viewers where then asked what they remembered more. The visual wrongness or the verbal one. People generally remembered the visual one.
- I do think this can be generalized to the larger society because people today have a tendency to look first and listen later. Such as if we see a color that says it is green but it is clearly yellow and someone next to us is telling us that it is yellow we usually just see it first and know. This is yellow.