I.

Introduction

Memory is a critical cognitive process that is known to encode, store and retrieve
information. Bartlett proposed the theory of reconstructive memory states the unreliability of
memory as it can be altered by a variety of things such as thoughts, feelings about past
events or unrelated memories that become misplaced together this phenomenon is known
as the misinformation effect. The theory explains how memory is a reconstructive process
rather than a passive, precise recording of previous events. He argued that external/post
event information influences memory, and that individuals actively piece together information
based on past knowledge and experiences. This process includes filling in gaps, making
sense of information and developing cohesive narratives. This prior information may be
stored in our schemas (mental frameworks that help to organize information about
environment). They must be quite stable, deeply rooted, and well-organized. Schemas assist
in the interpretation of large volumes of information accessible to us from the environment.

Research conducted by Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer supported the theory of
reconstructive memory. In their study they investigated if memory can be altered by
misleading post- event information (in an eyewitness situation). Participants were showed
recording of traffic accidents which was followed by a questionnaire with a few questions on
the video they watched. The questionnaire had one critical question “About how fast were
the cars going when they hit each other?”. The five groups only had the difference of the
emotional intensity of the verb used. The verbs were: “smashed”, “collided”, “bumped”, “hit”
and “contacted.”

This particular investigation seeks to investigate the theory of reconstructive memory by

replicating Loftus and Palmer’s study. Although unlike the original experiment only two
conditions will be taken “smashed” and “contacted”. Our experiment aims to investigate
how the memory of an event can be influenced by post-event information. The aim is
of relevance as, in the legal system the phrasing of questions has the ability to have an
effect on eyewitness accounts and the juror’s opinions. In everyday interactions for instance,
like family conversations, the framing of questions about a child’s day can influence
recollection. Asking, “Did you have fun playing with your friend” may lead to positive
memories whereas “Asking were you upset by something your friend did” may lead to
negative memories. The results of Loftus and Palmer suggested participants in an
eyewitness position provided inaccurate speed estimates showing the inaccuracy of
reconstructed memories. Through this replicated experiment we aim to gain more insight into
how reliable reconstructive memory is. We expect that post-event information will alter
memories of a car crash, causing them to be reconstructed through schema usage.

The Aim of this replicated study is to explore the influence of leading questions using
the verbs “contacted” and “smashed”.

Independent Variable: Emotional intensity of the verb (smashed/contacted) used in the

leading question.

Dependent Variable: Speed estimates (km/h) of 4 km per hour

Research Hypothesis (H1): states that participants exposed to leading questions with verb
with stronger emotional intensity (smashed) will provide significantly higher estimations of
speed (km/hour) of cars involved in a car accident compared to those exposed to questions
with verbs of less emotional intensity (contacted).
Null Hypothesis (H0): states that regardless of how the critical question is framed there will
be no significant difference in the participants' estimations of the speed (km/hour) of the
cars involved in the car research.

Design:
The experiment had employed an Independent Measures Design, there were in total
twenty participants who were randomly allocated in two groups- smashed and contacted.
This helped to ensure that there was use of different participants for each of the condition
of the experiment “smashed” and “contacted” which helped to reduce the presence of
order effects and demand characteristics. This means that each group only answered one
questionnaire, and both answered separate critical question about the car accident that
shown in the video. This was beneficial in avoiding demand characteristics, as they were
unlikely to predict the true aim of the experiment. Participants were assigned to groups at
random by allowing them t sit wherever in the classroom. The questionnaires were put on
the desks at random by researchers.

Sampling Method:
For this experiment the sample consisted of 20 IBDP students who were multicultural, fluent
in the language English and were of 15-17 mean years of age. The participants were
recruited through voluntary sampling technique. The whole grade 11 was sent a mail
informing about this experiment that would be conducted by us, students who wanted to
participate were free to mail. Through volunteer sampling technique, recruiting children for
the experiment in an educational setting was much easier and since it was voluntary the
participants interest in the experiment maintained till the end.

Choice Of Participants:
The participants in this study were 20 IBDP students, ten male students and ten female
students who were of 15-17 mean years of age. The participants were non- ib psychology
students as it is extremely likely they would be aware of Lotus and Palmer’s experiment
which would result in bias in their response and producing demand characteristics due to
their knowledge of the subject psychology. While filling the letter of consent the participants
confirmed their fluency in the language English, which aided in the proper interpretation of
questions and prevented language from becoming an extraneous variable.

Control Variable:
In this experiment there were various controls. In both smashed and contacted conditions
participants were given the same standardised briefing before the experiment from a script
that was read by the same researcher throughout to make sure everyone’s performance in
the experiment is in the same manner. The seating in the experiment room was at random.
Random allocation was helpful in ensuring there is no bias when the participants were asked
to answer questionnaires with difference of the emotional intensity of the verb .There was a
standardized video of a car accident, with no distractions in the video which was shown to
all the participants before they were asked to answer their respective questionnaires. Both
the questionnaires had the same number of questions,font,text size and asked the same
questions. The experiment purposely took place during the first lesson in the morning as it
was conducted during early morning hours, participants would be more likely to be
attentive and concentrate more om the experiment as the experiment took place during
morning hours, external noise that could be disturbing during participation was also be able
to be controlled.

Materials:

1.Paper: Paper was used for the questionnaires for the conditions (smashed/contacted)
given to the participants’

Pen: A pen was provided to the participants to record their responses

3.Projector: The projector helped to display the standardized video of the car crash to all of
the participants

4.Laptop: A laptop was used to connect to the projector to showcase the car crash video

5.Desks: Participants were given desks randomly so they can participate in the experiment
with ease

Procedure:
Participants were instructed to report to the psychology classroom during the morning free
lesson through the mail that was sent. The classroom was big enough to accommodate 20
students, each of whom were provided a pen and questionnaire on their desks. After the
participants had settled down, the researchers read them from the standardized
instructions (Appendix II), which required them to give over informed consent forms
(Appendix I). In order to comply with ethical principles such as informed consent and
anonymity, participants were informed as much as possible about the objectives of the
study. To maintain confidentiality they were instructed to not write their respective names
on the responses. After watching the car crash video (Appendix V).The participants started
answering questionnaires (appendix III0.The clip was chosen since it had a short running
time of ten seconds and could be shown to all of the participants on the projector through a
laptop as it was not very gruesome video. This helped to guarantee that all participants saw
the same clip. They were debriefed after completing questionnaires explaining the complete
aim of the study. (Appendix IV)

III.Analysis

Descriptive Statistics
For each condition (smashed and contacted) data was analyzed using mean and standard
deviation.

Group Mean Standard Deviation

Group 1 Contacted 58 25

Group 2 Smashed 80 35

Table 1. The influence of leading questions using the verbs “contacted” and
“smashed”

According to Table 1 above, group 1 with the verb “contacted” who was exposed to a verb
with lower emotional intensity is lower than the mean of the group two with the verb
“smashed” a verb with higher emotional intensity. However, the standard deviation for
Group is also larger than Group 1 showcasing in their responses greater variability for the
condition that uses a stronger verb. Suggesting, some participants in group 2 (smashed) had
high estimates which lead to the higher standard deviation.

In condition “smashed” the variation was larger than in comparison of the “contacted”
condition as the mean speed of smashed was 12km/h higher than of contacted. The
standard deviation for both groups (contacted and smashed) was relatively low, while the
standard deviation for smashed was 10 percent greater. The Mann-Whitney U
nonparametric test was used to evaluate whether there was a statistically significant
difference between the two groups. This test was excellent since the experiment
utilised an independent sample design and the data was considered ordinal. In
Loftus and Palmer's study, the difference in speed estimation between 'hit' and
smashed' was 10.5 km/h, which is similar to the difference found in this study, which
is 12.5 km/h. Inferential statistics must support the descriptive data that supports the
connection hypothesis between emotional intensity of a word and car estimate
speeds.

Inferential Statistics

The Mann-Whitney U nonparametric test was used to evaluate whether there was a
statistically significant difference between the two groups. This was done since the
experiment employed an independent measures design. The sample size was
limited, and the data varied. As a result, the U Test was not the best option. The test
revealed that speed estimates in the smashed group with a mean rank of 13.95 were
greater than in the struck group with a mean rank of 9.05. U= (11,11) =33.5, p0.05,
one-sided. The results were statistically significant, with U value smaller than the
critical value of 34. As a result, we reject the null hypothesis and support the study
hypothesis of emotional intensity of a verb in leading inquiries after an event
influencing memory. implying the likelihood of this effect being coincidence is less
than five percent.

Evaluation:

The findings of this experiment are confirmed with the theory of reconstructive memory.
While all the participants saw the same video, the speed estimations differed based on the
emotional intensity of the word used (contacted and smashed). Displaying post- event
information has a substantial impact on memory and can lead to a ‘reconstructed memory’.
Memory distortion is one example of how memories are not permanent or objective
representations of previous events. They can, however, be impacted and distorted by a variety
of circumstances such as disinformation. Memory’s unreliability has consequences for
eyewitness evidence, judicial procedures, and the veracity of our personal recollections.

DESIGN-

Strength: The strength of using Independent Measures Design is that by using different
participants for each condition (smashed and contacted) it helps to avoid order effects and
fatigue within participants. Each group ha

As each group had also been handled individually, individual traits or personal qualities were
less likely to affect the outcomes.

Limitation: One problem of employing the independent measures approach was that
randomly assigning individuals to groups did not account for participant variability. As the
study entailed assessing the speed of automobiles, something the participants were unfamiliar
with due to their age range of 15-17 as eleventh grade students and underage drivers.

Modification- An adjustment may be to employ a scenario or circumstance that is relevant to

the participant’s age group and experiences would also help activate the right schema during
the experiment. For example, instead of using a car accident scenario, the study could involve
showing a bicycle video.

SAMPLE:

Strengths: The use of voluntary sample of 10 females and 10 males has the advantage of
increasing the study’s ecological validity by incorporating individuals from a variety of
backgrounds and experiences; hence the findings may be more relevant to real – life
circumstances and generalise to a larger population.

Limitation- Although It is vital to note that the participants in this study are underage, as the
sample consists of 11th grade students. This is cause for worry because the surveys featured
questions about driving, which subjects were most likely not exposed to.It is possible that
their schemas have not yet been engaged, which might have hampered their speed estimation.
Modification-By using adults like teachers instead of students might be a better choice as
they are familiar and have more experience with the activity of driving due to the higher age
bracket.

PROCEDURE:

Strength: The control over extraneous variables was a strength of the study’s procedure as
the experiment was done in a controlled environment of a classroom. The possibility of
cofounding variables like such as different ambient conditions biasing the participants speed
estimations seemed improbable because all participants were shown in the same video, in the
same location and were given the identical questionnaires.

Limitation: One restriction is that the surveys did not identify a unit of measurement such as
kmph.Some participants estimated their speeds in miles per hour, which had to be converted
subsequently.

Modification: Initially, we did not include a unit specification because we believed it would
confuse participants and researchers when reviewing the findings. To change this, we should
have added to specify their unit to eliminate this limitation.

Finally, the experiment confirms the hypothesis of reconstructive memory with statistical
significance at the p0.05 level, while future adjustments would assist to increase effect
magnitude and offer greater assurance in the results obtained.