# data[].attributes.headline
To counter for limitations within this experiment, a more diverse age group and repeating experimentation could be considered

# data[].attributes.subject
To counter for limitations within this experiment, a more diverse age group and repeating experimentation could be considered

# data[].attributes.body
There could have been more people and more age differences in the experiment, and the broken glass question could have been reworded

# data[].attributes.body
Have an actual car crash occur

test it on older students or even teachers!

uni students would be better

# data[].attributes.body
more people

# data[].attributes.body
The amount of test participants would need to be increased and having the same presenter

# data[].attributes.body
To improve this we need to get a bigger sample group as the one we used was not big enough.

# data[].attributes.headline
this study has this limitation of the sample size. to improve this a larger 

# data[].attributes.subject
this study has this limitation of the sample size. to improve this a larger 

# data[].attributes.body
The ecological validity of the study is low, because it was a laboratory experiment so the results cannot be generalised unconditionally to a larger population. Being conducted in an artificial environment, the study also lacked in realism. People are likely to react differently when witnessing a real life scenario similar to the one shown in the video, because of their actual presence and likely personal involvement. The participants might have also responded to demand characteristics, as they may worked out the aim of the study.

# data[].attributes.body
The fact that the experiment used students as participants has also been criticized because students are not representative of a general population.

# data[].attributes.headline
we cannot genralise the results of this experiment as this was a very small sample size

# data[].attributes.subject
we cannot genralise the results of this experiment as this was a very small sample size

# data[].attributes.body
these results can't be generalised because the sample size was very small in number, and covered a very small demographic. this experiment was also undertaken by year 12 students that don't have formal training in psychological research and the experiment conditions weren't very controlled.

# data[].attributes.body
We need a bigger sample size

# data[].attributes.body
It would be difficult to generalise findings from laboratory experiments because they are not ecologically valid (true to real life).

# data[].attributes.headline
3. no we cannot generalize this because every one is different and some people have stronger memories

# data[].attributes.subject
3. no we cannot generalize this because every one is different and some people have stronger memories

# data[].attributes.body
We cannot generalize these results because Australians are a broad range of ages and have a wide range of road experience, which may mean that

# data[].attributes.headline
3. we can not generalise for the whole population 

# data[].attributes.subject
3. we can not generalise for the whole population 

# data[].attributes.body
This experiment is not able to be generalized as the experimental group was too small, the number of test subjects would need to be a great deal larger in order to be valid.

# data[].attributes.body
it is not necessary that all Australians will be impacted the same way as everyone is different and has had different life experiences.

# data[].attributes.body
these results most likely cannot be generalised to a larger population. this can be because the participants selected for experiment do not represent a large enough amount of the population.

# data[].attributes.headline
These results cannot be generalised to a wider population due to limitations and errors which presented themselves during experimentation. It cannot be assumed that the same results would be obtained if a larger age group was used or a larger sample size

# data[].attributes.subject
These results cannot be generalised to a wider population due to limitations and errors which presented themselves during experimentation. It cannot be assumed that the same results would be obtained if a larger age group was used or a larger sample size

# data[].attributes.body
We can generalise the experiment as Loftus has done this study and it keeps occuring.

# data[].attributes.body
We could generalise these results, as the results have supported Loftus' experiments conclusions, so there have been other studies that have come to the same conclusion.

# data[].attributes.body
no  dont think we can because we only had a small sample size within our school, so we cant say that all of Australia would act in the same way.

# data[].attributes.body
The experiment was not typical of real life situations. The experiment is artificial in the sense that is different from how people would normally witness events. For example, when the participants were giving their estimates of speed, they did not have any personal involvement in the judgement and had not taken part in the event. When we witness events in everyday life, we often have some involvement in the people or the action. Therefore it should be difficult to generalise findings from laboratory experiments because they are not ecologically valid (true to real life).

# data[].attributes.headline
2.2 the sample size , some of or original participants were away 

# data[].attributes.subject
2.2 the sample size , some of or original participants were away 

# data[].attributes.body
A problem with the study was students who weren't taking the experiment seriously and that the script was not followed during the experiment.

# data[].attributes.body
potential errors that may have occurred in this experiment may include that; having a larger experimental group may have given more diverse data that gives a better representation of the hypothesis. another limitation may include that there was no control group included which means that the obtained results cannot be compared to anything.

# data[].attributes.body
Potential errors of this experiment include but are not limited to, the inconsistencies between students during stage 1 and stage 2 of testing. Seeing as some of the students who were present during stage 1 were not present during stage 2 and vice versa. This made the experiment unreliable due to the small subject group.

# data[].attributes.body
A limitation with the study was the use of students as participants. Students are not representative of the general population in a number of ways. Importantly they may be less experienced drivers and therefore less confident in their ability to estimate speeds. This may have influenced them to be more swayed by the verb in the question.

# data[].attributes.headline
2. There were many errors and limitations of this experiment which may have impacted the validity and accuracy of the results. Due to ethical limitations, students were shown a clip of a car crash rather than a real-life incident or simulation of a car crash. The disparity of watching a footage of a car crash rather than a simulation may influence how the information was perceived and remembered. Adrenaline released in stressful situation allows memories to be encoded and stored more easily.

# data[].attributes.subject
2. There were many errors and limitations of this experiment which may have impacted the validity and accuracy of the results. Due to ethical limitations, students were shown a clip of a car crash rather than a real-life incident or simulation of a car crash. The disparity of watching a footage of a car crash rather than a simulation may influence how the information was perceived and remembered. Adrenaline released in stressful situation allows memories to be encoded and stored more easily.

# data[].attributes.body
Potential errors include the script that was followed by the experimenters which may have not been followed exactly for every class. Leaving 4 days between the video being shown and the broken glass question could have effected the study as the children could have forgotten the video and just guessed.
By using year 7 and 8 participants it can be assumed that the majority of them do not have a strong idea of how fast a car is going just by watching it in a video. we were unable to subject the students to a real-life car crash which limited our study due to the fact that when an eye-witness testimony is required it is when they're involved.

# data[].attributes.headline
2. potential errors in this is that some participants were not there on the second day when we asked about the broken glass. the footage that we used was different to loftus' 

# data[].attributes.subject
2. potential errors in this is that some participants were not there on the second day when we asked about the broken glass. the footage that we used was different to loftus' 

# data[].attributes.headline
2. This experiment lacked a consistent number of participants, as there was students that were not present during the first and second part. In order to ensure that the results had the same amount of results, a dedicated group of students would need to be selected and that they were all present during both periods of the experiment. A limitation that consisted within this experiment is that there was only two differing verbs in the leading question: hit and smashed. Having more verbs, each with a different extremity, would support the relationship between leading questions and the fallibility of memory in a much more stronger sense.  

# data[].attributes.subject
2. This experiment lacked a consistent number of participants, as there was students that were not present during the first and second part. In order to ensure that the results had the same amount of results, a dedicated group of students would need to be selected and that they were all present during both periods of the experiment. A limitation that consisted within this experiment is that there was only two differing verbs in the leading question: hit and smashed. Having more verbs, each with a different extremity, would support the relationship between leading questions and the fallibility of memory in a much more stronger sense.  

# data[].attributes.body
The errors that could have occurred during this experiment is the fact that each of the four classes had a different group presenting the script made up and could have influenced the way the students felt or how much they concentrated. The experiment could be improved slightly by using the same group of presenters for each class.

# data[].attributes.body
2. Potential errors:

Limitations: Small sample size, very little control of extraneous variables,

# data[].attributes.body
Some errors within the experiment was that there wasn't many students. Some of them didn't take it seriously as we questioned students.

# data[].attributes.body
potential errors could include students being away in the first class of the experiment or students being away on the second day of the experiment. this could cause a change in the number of participation.
another limitation could be that the answers given by the students were not done appropriately or seriously enough to help the group results and the measures of the experiment.
another limitation could be for the students to be able to connect with the video and a real life situation. answers could effect our results if students have had past experience like this the results will vary to students that have had no experience like this.

# data[].attributes.body
Potential errors in this experiment were, the age of the participants may have affected the outcome of the experiment as the subject may have not been focusing as much as adults would.
also, because the subjects were too young to be driving they may not have a good sense of speed.
The subjects also may not have remembered the video because it wouldnt impact them very much, so they may have guessed everything

# data[].attributes.body
The results somewhat supported the hypothesis, and the results suggest a moderate correlation between leading questions and recall. Students asked about the cars that "smashed" had a higher rate of recalling broken glass than those about the cars that "hit".
The difference between the answers was a 5% difference, meaning the effect was observed, but limited.

# data[].attributes.body
The results of the experiment  show that by providing a leading question after an allocated time frame allowed for the creating of an altered/false memory. This supported the hypothesis but this is not fully conclusive as the percentages provided showed too much room for error.

# data[].attributes.body
the ecological validity in this study may be considered low because the study utilised laboratory experiments, which involved the participants watching videos of car crashes. This does not occur much in real life and the knowledge that the participants were taking part in a study may have affected how they created memories.

# data[].attributes.body
This experiment demonstrates that by posing leading questions to subjects you can position them to answer in a certain way. :)

# data[].attributes.body
One limitation of the research is that it lacked mundane realism / ecological validity. Participants viewed video clips rather than being present at a real life accident. As the video clip does not have the same emotional impact as witnessing a real-life accident the participants would be less likely to pay attention and less motivated to be accurate in their judgements.

# data[].attributes.body
The results of the experiment showed that memory can be

# data[].attributes.body
the results of the experiment showed that the hypothesis wasnt supported.

# data[].attributes.headline
the experiments results showed that the leading questions are able influence someones memory. the group that was presented with the word smashed had recorded a higher percentage of seeing broken glass than those who were presented with the word hit.

# data[].attributes.subject
the experiments results showed that the leading questions are able influence someones memory. the group that was presented with the word smashed had recorded a higher percentage of seeing broken glass than those who were presented with the word hit.

# data[].attributes.body
The experiments results showed that leading questions can sway a person towards a certain answer or feeling. The results were that approximately 5% more subjects from group B said that they saw broken glass at the scene, this shows that having the word smashed in their question influenced them to see the crash as worse than what they saw. done

# data[].attributes.headline
The results of this experiment do not show a strong association between the word used in the leading question and whether the participants were able to or not able to recall seeing glass. Both group A and B contained a higher percentage of students recalling glass in the video 

# data[].attributes.subject
The results of this experiment do not show a strong association between the word used in the leading question and whether the participants were able to or not able to recall seeing glass. Both group A and B contained a higher percentage of students recalling glass in the video 

# data[].attributes.body
The results of this experiment shows that a false memory can be made by a leading question. The results showed that approximately 5% more students from group B said they saw broken glass, by them having the word smashed it would have influenced them to see things that weren't actually in the video.

# data[].attributes.body
Based on the results of the experiment,

# data[].attributes.body
Based on the results of the experi

# data[].attributes.body
The results of the experiment suggest that leading questions can influence people's memory recall. Students who had the

# data[].attributes.headline
The experiments results showed that leading questions can sway a person towards a certain answer or feeling. The results were that approximately 5% more subjects from group B said that they saw broken glass at the scene, this shows that having the word smashed in their question influenced them to see the crash as worse than what they saw.  done

# data[].attributes.subject
The experiments results showed that leading questions can sway a person towards a certain answer or feeling. The results were that approximately 5% more subjects from group B said that they saw broken glass at the scene, this shows that having the word smashed in their question influenced them to see the crash as worse than what they saw.  done

# data[].attributes.body
the results obtained show that individuals can learn and retain false memories, therefore supporting the hypothesis to an extent as there were errors that have occurred which are present in the data collected. as there isn't a large enough difference to draw conclusions.

# data[].attributes.body
the results of the experiment showed that group B who were given the word 'smashed' were more likely to have the fake memory (IV) of broken glass being at the accident than group A who  were given the word 'hit'. This shows that memory is fallible (DV

# data[].attributes.body
The experiment

# data[].attributes.headline
The results of the experiment show that memory can be fallible and that by using leading questions one can influence how someone has interpreted an event they have witnessed, thus changing their memory.  

# data[].attributes.subject
The results of the experiment show that memory can be fallible and that by using leading questions one can influence how someone has interpreted an event they have witnessed, thus changing their memory.  

# data[].attributes.headline
The results of the experiment showed that leading questions are able to influence one's memory of an event. The group who were presented with the word smashed had a higher percentage of recalling broken glass, whilst those who were presented with hit had a lower percentage of recalling broken glass.

# data[].attributes.subject
The results of the experiment showed that leading questions are able to influence one's memory of an event. The group who were presented with the word smashed had a higher percentage of recalling broken glass, whilst those who were presented with hit had a lower percentage of recalling broken glass.

# data[].attributes.body
the results of the experiment shows that our hypothesis is supported as the students did see glass when recalled. when the classes were asked whether the cars 'smashed'  or 'hit' each other. the classes that were presented with 'smashed' were thought to be seeing glass over the classes described as 'hit'.

# data[].attributes.body
The results of the experiment showed that leading questions can sway a person towards a certain answer or feeling. The results were that approximately 5% more subjects from group B said that they saw broken glass at the scene, this shows that having the word smashed in their question influenced them to see the crash as worse than what they actually saw. the hypothesis was supported.