1. By Dhina, Haneen, Viveka, and Natsuki Elizabeth Loftus

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

3.  If a person’s 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.  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.  Experiment 1  45 participants were shown films of traffic accidents. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Urcl0gD6YWI&feature=related ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Urcl0gD6YWI&feature=related  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.  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 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. SmashedCollidedBumpedHitContacted 4139383432 ResponseSmashedHitControl Yes1676 No344344

8. 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. 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 hadn’t 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.  Strengths: -Classic Study -A controlled experiment -Reliability -Has realistic implications  Weaknesses: -Lacks ecological validity -Ethics -Students were used, not a representative sample

11.  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. 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.  http://onlineclassroom.tv/files/series/psychology/understanding_psyc hology/classic_studies_in_psychology_1/document4/Loftus%20on%20E yewitness%20Testimony.ppt http://onlineclassroom.tv/files/series/psychology/understanding_psyc hology/classic_studies_in_psychology_1/document4/Loftus%20on%20E yewitness%20Testimony.ppt  http://www.holah.co.uk/study/loftus/ http://www.holah.co.uk/study/loftus/  http://www.thegrangeschool.net/blogs/psychology/files/2009/09/AS_ AQA_memory_ewtfactors.ppt http://www.thegrangeschool.net/blogs/psychology/files/2009/09/AS_ AQA_memory_ewtfactors.ppt  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Urcl0gD6YWI&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Urcl0gD6YWI&feature=related