Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction. Loftus, E. F. and Palmer, J. C. (1974)

A review of the experiment by Loftus, E. F. and Palmer, J. C. (1974)

Aim:
To investigate the influence of information supplied after an event on a person’s memory of the event.

Method:
Two separate, though similar, experiments were conducted.
Experimental Design: Independent measure design
Independent Variable: Verb used
Dependant Variable:
For one of the experiments (Experiment 1), participants’ speed estimate.
For the other experiment (Experiment 2), belief of the participants that they saw glass

Experiment 1:

Aim:
To investigate how the information provided after an event affects the person's memory of that event.

Materials used:
45 participants (students of University of Washington)
7 film-clips of traffic accidents ranging from 5 to 30 seconds (excerpts from safety films made for drivers’ education)
Students were made to write an account of the accident clip.
They were made to answer questions. The wordings of one of these questions, which was related to speed, were manipulated (independent variable)

Procedure:
The experimental group was divided into five.
Each group was subjected to different conditions; i.e. the independent variable was manipulated, so that the questions posed for each group had one of the words from ‘smashed’, ‘collided’, ‘bumped’, ‘hit’ and ‘contacted’ (words showing different intensities of impact) inserted into the question ‘About how fast were the cars going when they ______ into each other’
The ordering of the films was also manipulated, such that every person in 1 condition group was shown the clips in a different order.
The speed estimates of the participants were recorded.

Results:
The following chart displays the difference between the estimates provided by participants in the different conditions.
It can be seen that a variation 9 mph occurs between the estimates provided, from 1) smashed, the verb with most intensity to 5) contacted, the verb implying least intensity

Findings:
Loftus and Palmer explained these findings by saying that
1. The verbal label provided by the experimenter for the accident distorted the memory of the participants
2. They confess that the results could be due to ‘response-bias’ meaning that because they did not estimate the speed with surety they could have adjusted the speed according to the condition.

Experiment 2:

Aim:
The second experiment was conducted to investigate why information
supplied after an event influences a person’s memory of that event.

Materials used:
1. 150 participants (students)
2. A minute-long film which contained a 4-second sequence of an accident involving more than one car.
3. The participants were interrogated about the clip, with the manipulation of the IV occurring with the experimenter using the word 'hit' or 'smashed' in the question 'How fast were the cars going when they ______ each other?'
4. The participants were asked, a week later, several questions. The one that determined the DV was 'Did you see any broken glass?'

Procedure:
· The participants were divided into three groups; two experimental and one control.
· The IV was manipulated for the experimental groups when they were asked questions about the experiment. The control group was not interrogated.
· The participants were asked to return a week later. They were, then, asked some questions about the clip.
· The critical question about the broken glass was asked randomly and the responses of the participants were recorded.

Results:
The following chart shows how the responses of the participants varied with the independent variable:
The results show that the number of participants from the 'smash' group who believed that they had seen glass is significantly higher than the 'hit' or 'control' group.

Findings:
Based on these findings, Loftus and Palmer developed an explanation which says that the information going into the memory is of two kinds, the information obtained from perception of an event and that obtained from information supplied after the event.

Over time, the information gets integrated such that one is not able to differentiate between the sources of the details. In the end, people only have one memory. This is called 'reconstructive hypothesis'.

In the second experiment, the memory of the video-clip and the word 'smash' which implied that the cars did smash into each other. These two memories become integrated and the participant is led to believe that the accident was more severe than it actually was.


Evaluation:

The experiment was well-controlled as Loftus and Palmer had controlled the timings and place of the experiment. Moreover, varying the pattern of viewing the clips for participants and placing the questions in the second experiment randomly makes the experiment more valid. Because films were shows, it provided a filter for participant-bias.

However, the use of the findings to prove that speed estimates provided by witnesses cannot be considered as valid. This is because the environment in which this study takes place and the environments in real-life situations are different. This means that the study is not quite ecologically valid.

Moreover, there is a difference in the areas of interest and memory capabilities of students and other people.

Basically, the findings face criticism on their being generalized. For example, memory of eye-witnessed events could also be influenced by factors such as sleeplessness, alcohol, emotional attachment and the environment etc.

Another criticism faced by these findings is that the responses were either biased because of the questions asked, or that the queues provided by the questions led to a distortion in the retrieved memory (the original memory remained intact)

Analysis of the theories of Carl Jung and Alfred Adler

Carl Jung (1875-1961):

Carl Jung was a Swiss psychologist who, initially, agreed with Sigmund Freud. However, after an affiliation of around 7 years, he broke away from Freud and gave some new theories.

He agrees with Freud on the division of mind into conscious and sub-conscious regions. He talks about the presence of the ego in the conscious mind, quite like Freud. However, he does not believe that sexual instincts lie at the heart of all human behavior. The goal of development, according to Jung, is that the conscious of the person has to come into contact with the person’s unconscious. He goes on to talk about the self (the combination of the conscious and unconscious), persona (the façade that people put up in public) in the conscious mind, the shadow (the person’s true self), the collective unconscious (the part of the unconscious mind that is passed down to us from our ancestors) in the unconscious mind.

The problem with Jung’s theories, as was with those of Freud’s, is that these theories cannot be refuted; this is because they are not based on empirical evidence. However, these theories can be traced to Jung’s early childhood.

Carl was an only child and his mother faced psychological problems, because of which he was often lonely. His mother, Emilie suffered from depression and spent most of her time in her room where, she said, she was visited by spirits. On the other hand, Carl’s father was strictly rational and, later on, Jung is said to have had several disputes with him over the issue of rationality versus spirituality. Perhaps, it was Jung’s sympathy for her mother and resentment of his father’s attitude that gave him an inclination towards spirituality and aversion to rationality.
On the other hand, it can also be said of him that as a lonely child he spent a lot of time on solitary reflection and imagination. Perhaps, it was this time when Jung developed an understanding of various aspects of human behavior, e.g. persona and shadow etc., that were later incorporated into his theories.

‘As a boy he carved a tiny manikin into the end of the wooden ruler from his pupil's pencil case and placed it inside the case. He then added a stone which he had painted into upper and lower halves of, and hid the case in the attic. Periodically he would come back to the manikin, often bringing tiny sheets of paper with messages inscribed on them in his own secret language. This ceremonial act, he later reflected, brought him a feeling of inner peace and security. In later years, he discovered that similarities existed in this memory and the totems of native peoples like the collection of soul-stones near Arlesheim, or the tjurungas of Australia’.(www.wikipedia.com, Carl Jung, 23/11/07) This incident was, perhaps, one of his inspirations for his theory on collective unconscious.

This theory of Carl Jung can be falsified by comparing the archetypes of the modern world with those of, perhaps, ancient Greece. In fact, after the World Wars society has faced major and rapid changes. Perhaps, Jung died before these changes became widespread and had an influence on the symbolism and archetypes.
It has been said of Jung that he broke away from Freud due to personal, and not academic, reasons. Freud and Jung were very close to each other, like father and son. However, some researchers believe that Jung, who had been unable to develop a good relationship with his own father, unconsciously brought the disputes and complexes from that relationship into this one. Moreover, there are reports that Freud visited a friend, in 1912, in a city near Zurich, where Jung lived, without visiting him, and Jung felt severely slighted. Perhaps, this was the time when Jung finally decided to break off. (www.wikipedia.com, Carl Jung, 23/11/07)


Alfred Adler (1870-1937)

Alfred Adler founded, what is known as, the ‘Individual Psychology’. He says that man, unlike that presented by Freud, is a self-conscious whole and not a collection of drives and instincts. Moreover, he says that man is basically caring and productive, and not barbaric in nature. Also, according to Adler, the basic goal of a man is self-realization. He, too, emphasizes on childhood as a part when the foundations for the personality are laid, however, for him development and self-realization are processes that carry on throughout the individual’s life.

Though, his theories can neither be termed as completely inaccurate, nor can they be called entirely true. For example, his theories on birth order cannot be considered universal. Though there are families on whom Adler’s description fits perfectly, there are perhaps just as many, other families for whom the reverse is true. He says that children who have inferiority complexes strive to compensate for their weaknesses in other areas. However, this means that children with a healthy level of self-esteem are stagnant and unmotivated, which obviously is not true.

However, what can be done is that his theories can be traced to his own childhood.

Adler was a sickly child and his skinniness embarrassed him. This was also the cause, perhaps, of his studying hard and going on to become a physician. Perhaps his own life inspired him to think in terms of inferiority complexes and compensation. His observations of the children around him who were bolder and more confident could have provided the inspiration for his theory of superiority complexes.

Moreover, his family problems, e.g. the death of a sibling while they were sleeping next to each other and the fact that he was expected to be responsible etc. might have led to his beliefs about the effect of birth order.

Memory Model

(Click on image for sharper image)

Reference: http://www.coursework.info/AS_and_A_Level/Psychology/Cognative_Psychology/Encoding_in_short_term_memory_-_Conrad_L15549.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory#Sensory