Milner (1966)
Longitudinal case study
What was the aim?
To investigate whether the use of leading questions would affect the estimation of speed.
What theory are the researchers investigating?
Anchoring bias
How many cases were looked at?
506 cases
What event was the study done on?
The Marmara earthquake, August 17th 1999
What is triangulation?
The use of more than one method to ensure depth in the analysis.
What was the aim?
To investigate whether the use of leading questions would affect the estimation of speed.
What is the dual processing model?
System 1: Impulsive based on schema and past experiences
System 2: Conscious thinking
What Theory does this study support?
The Halo effect
What model does the study support?
Flashbulb memory model
How did he sustain the head injury?
He was hit by a cyclist while crossing the street when he was 7 years old
What verb resulted in the highest estimated mean speed?
Smashed
What was the Independent Variable?
- The amount of months the judge prosecution demanded
- Either 12 months or 34 months
What is the Halo effect?
The false correlation of positive characteristics, i.e. the assumption that someone who has a few positive characteristics has many
What was the research method?
Self-reported questionnaire
Distinguish, episodic knowledge and semantic knowledge.
Episodic knowledge:
- A memory of an event.
Semantic knowledge:
- General knowledge about the world.
why does the study have low ecological validity?
- Lab experiments don't reflect how people remember in real life
- The experiment was made for teaching purposes and therefore the participants did not experience the same kind of emotion that they would experience in a real accident
What was the average sentence given, by both the high anchor group (34 months) and the low anchor group (12 months)?
Low anchor group = ~18 months
High anchor group = ~28 months
true or false:
The study also measured for a possible correlation between nine other variables such as height, age, weight, clothing, wears glasses
True
What is implied by the evaluation that the method was largely QUANTITATIVE while the findings are QUALITATIVE?
The research method doesn't fit with the nature of the Findings since you are researching qualitative data through the use of a quantitative process.
Damage to the hippocampus explains the problem of transferring short-term memory to long-term memory.
What was asked in the second part of the experiment and what was the information for?
They were asked whether or not they saw broken objects and this was to test the reliability of eye-witnesses
Evaluate the study by finding two strengths and two limitations.
Strength:
- Experiment -> Cause and effect
- The use of a pilot group helped to establish reasonable anchor
Limitation:
- Sample size was small
- The judges' confidence may have been influenced by other factors.
- Sample was mainly white, male and middle-aged, so it cant be generalized.
- The study didn't conclude a cause-effect relationship, simply a correlation.
name 3 other studies which we learned about that also support flashbulb memory.
Bernston & Thomsen (2005)
Neissar & Harsch (1992)
Brown & Kulik (1977)
Er (2003)
Sharot (2007)
Kulkofsky (2011)