They selected one hundred participants and showed them a film of a car accident. The participants were then asked to fill out a 22 item questionnaire which contained six "critical" questions. For half of the participants the six critical questions started with "did you see a..." while for the other half of the students the questions began with "did you see the...". The "a" being indefinite and the "the" being definite.
The results showed that 15% of the participants answered yes when the definite article was used and with the indefinite article 7% answered no.
This experiment shows that you can change the way that people react to questions just by using definite or indefinite articles in the question. When using a definite article you are misleading the participant as it suggests that what you are saying is actually true.
This is unethical as this technique could be used in the court room to make witnesses say they saw something that they in fact did not see.
Aim:
The aim of this experiment is to see how the use of a definite or indefinite article can affect the answers that participants give when asked about what they have seen in a selection of pictures.
Alternative hypothesis:
The use of a definite article would in fact produce a different answer from the participants than the use of an indefinite article. It is predicted that the use of a definite article is more likely to return a positive answer from the participant, whereas an indefinite article is least likely to return a positive answer from the participant.
Null hypothesis:
The use of a definite or indefinite article will in fact have no difference on the answers given by the participants.
Design
The independent variable in this experiment was whether or not a definite or indefinite article was used. In this case the definite article was the word ‘the’ and the indefinite article was the word ‘a’. The dependant variable was the number of participants that said they saw something that was not actually there just because the question was asked using a definite article rather than an indefinite article.
An extraneous variable is something that could affect the results of the experiment. An extraneous variable for this experiment could have been if there was a window in the room then the participant may have been distracted by what was going on outside the room and therefore not be able to concentrate fully on the experiment and therefore having a negative effect on the DV. This was controlled by closing the blinds and doors in the room in which the experiment took place to keep all distractions to a minimum.
An ethical issue in this study was informed consent. Informed consent is where the researcher gets the signature of the participants to say that they are willing to take part in the experiment and that they understand what is going to happen in the experiment.
The participants were asked for their consent in the brief of the experiment and were asked for their signature therefore making the experiment more ethical as they have given informed consent.
Participants:
The target population was students over the age of 16 at King Edward VI sixth form in Morpeth in the North East of England.
The sampling method used is known as ‘non random opportunity sampling’ Non opportunity sampling is where the researcher takes advantage of having some participants available to include in the research. This is simply made up of people that are available and willing. The reason that this method of sampling was used is that it is quick, easy and free. It is straight forward as it takes no preparation as the researcher can just pick who they want straight away without having to go through any sort of process. Seven participants were selected using this sampling method.
Apparatus and Materials:
In this experiment 5 different pictures were used so that questions could be asked about them using the indefinite and definite articles mentioned earlier.
Procedure
Brief:
By taking part in this investigation you are agreeing to partake in an investigation into how the use of definite or indefinite articles in a question affects the answer a participant gives. You will not be deceived in any way during this experiment and it is completely anonymous. You will not be emotionally or physically harmed by taking part in this investigation and you have the right to withdraw yourself and your results at any time. A signature is required for proof of consent however your name will not be used in any way to keep anonymity.
Method:
The participants were sat down one by one at a table with nothing but a piece of paper and a pen on it. Before the experiment began the participants were given the brief. In the brief it was explained what would be happening in the experiment and since there was no deception involved there was no need for the issue to be addressed. The participants were asked to sign a piece of paper and print their name next to it to say that they gave their consent to participate in the experiment. All blinds in the room were closed and any computer screens were turned off to get rid of any distractions. After this 5 different pictures were shown one after the other (each being held up for 5 seconds) to the participants. Once all of the pictures had been shown the same process was repeated to make sure that the participants had seen all the pictures well. After this the participant was asked five questions containing a definite article and 5 questions containing an indefinite article by the researcher who recorded the answers on the piece of paper. Each question was about whether or not they could recall a certain thing in the set of pictures.
Debrief:
Thank you for taking part in this experiment. You still have the right to withdraw your results at anytime. Your signature will not be passed on to any other party and your name will remain anonymous. Any questions can be asked at the end.
Results
Table 1 showing the mean, median and mode for when a definite article is used in a question to see if the participant says they saw a thing in a set of pictures that wasn’t actually there.
Table 2 showing the mean, median and mode for when an indefinite article is used in a question to see if the participant says they saw a thing in a set of pictures that wasn’t actually there.
For the raw data and calculations see appendix.
When both tables are looked at together the means show that more people are likely to say they have seen something that was not actually there when a definite article is used than when an indefinite article is used. This accepts the hypothesis and rejects the null hypothesis.
Discussion:
This piece of coursework has agreed with Loftus and Zanni's experiment due to the results showing that people make more mistakes is asked “did you see the…” than if asked “did you see a …” therefore accepting the alternative hypothesis and rejecting the null hypothesis. In this experiment there was high replicability and a different target population to that of Loftus and Zanni and yet has still agreed with their results.
Based on the findings of the experiment it can be concluded that people can be misled into thinking that they have seen something when they have not by the use of a definite article. In real life the police and lawyers need to be trained to be very careful how they ask witnesses questions.
A limitation in this experiment could be sample size because there were only seven participants so this is not representative of the target population thus making it difficult to generalise the results with confidence.
A way in which this experiment could be improved could be to increase the sample size. Doing this would improve generalisability as the sample would be representative of the target population.
Further research could be undertaken by adding a new the variable and using age as a new variable i.e. young (sixth formers) vs. old (retired) participants. There would be four conditions- old people and definite article, old people and indefinite article, young people and definite article and young people and indefinite article. There is evidence to show that memory deteriorates with age so it would be interesting to see whether this research would support that or refuse it.
References
Gross R.D. (1996) Psychology The Science of Mind and Behavior, Hodder and Stoughton.
