Head to www.savemyexams.

com for more awesome resources

DP IB Psychology: SL Your notes

Reliability of Cognitive Processes

Contents
Reconstructive Memory: The Effect of Schema on Memory
Reconstructive Memory: Eye Witness Testimony
Two Key Studies of Reconstructive Memory: Bartlett (1932) & Loftus & Palmer (1974)
Cognitive Biases: Illusory Correlation
Cognitive Biases: Just World Hypothesis
Two Key Studies of Cognitive Biases: Hamilton & Gifford (1976) & Piliavin et al. (1969)

Page 1 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Reconstructive Memory: The Effect of Schema on Memory

Your notes
Reconstructive Memory: The Effect of Schema on
Memory
What is reconstructive memory?
Memory is not like a camera, it does not record an event faithfully or with 100% accuracy, rather it is
retrieved as fragments of the event, sometimes omitting key pieces of information or inserting
information which was not present at the time of the event; sometimes recalling the sequences of the
event in a different order to the original; sometimes being influenced by other people’s recall of the
event or by media reports of the event
Information after the event is one way in which reconstructive memory (RM) may be manifest i.e. you
are present at a birthday party but your recall of the party will be influenced by discussing it with others
afterwards, by viewing photos of the party on social media, by your memories of other birthday parties
you have attended in the past
Confabulation is another way in which RM occurs in which recall of the event is impacted by distortion
of the information, fabrication of details (e.g. inserting details not present at the time of the event),
misinterpretation of the information

What is the relevance of schema and reconstructive memory?

A schema is a set of pre-existing ideas, beliefs and concepts an individual has about people, places,
events, ideas etc. which means that schemas may give rise to distorted memory
When you experience an event either directly or indirectly it is usual for schematic activation to guide
your understanding/expectation of that event e.g. you plan a holiday to Italy where you expect to see a
lot of people waving their arms around in an excitable way and eating pasta (not at the same time of
course!) hence schemas also contribute to stereotypes
The problem with having set and pre-determined schemas is that they can interfere with accurate
recall– this happens when someone recalls an event not as it truly happened but as a result of
schematic interference i.e. their schemas ‘got in the way’ of 100% accurate recall of the event
(generally people are unaware of this happening)
Schemas are relevant to RM as they produce biased recall e.g. you are in a pub and there is a fight, the
police ask you what you witnessed and you say that one man was bleeding but in fact this is not true –
your schema for ‘fight’ added blood at the scene because it fits your schema for ‘fight’
Cultural schemas may lead to incorrect and faulty recall of material which does not align with or fit into
a person’s schema based on their own culture

Page 2 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Your notes

Your memory of a childhood birthday party may be very different to someone else’s – even though you
were both present at the same time.
Which research studies investigate reconstructive memory and
schema?
Bartlett (1932) – cultural schemas produce distorted recall of a culturally unfamiliar story
Bartlett (1932) is available as a separate Key Study – just navigate the Reliability of Cognitive Processes
section of this topic to find it (Two Key Studies of Reconstructive Memory). Bartlett’s study is also included
in Two Key Studies of Cognitive Processing which can be found in the Cognitive Processing section of this
site

Examiner Tips and Tricks

You can use Bartlett (1932) to answer a question on schema theory too (see the above comment on
where to find this) as this research was based on how cultural schemas impact recall, producing
memories which are unreliable

Page 3 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Reconstructive Memory: Eye Witness Testimony

Your notes
Reconstructive Memory: Eyewitness Testimony
What is reconstructive memory?
Memory is not like a camera, it does not record an event faithfully or with 100% accuracy, rather it is
retrieved as fragments of the event:
sometimes omitting key pieces of information or inserting information which was not present at
the time of the event;
sometimes recalling the sequences of the event in a different order to the original;
sometimes being influenced by other people’s recall of the event or by media reports of the event
Information after the event is one way in which reconstructive memory (RM) may be manifested i.e.
you are present at a birthday party but your recall of the party will be influenced by discussing it with
others afterwards, by viewing photos of the party on social media, by your memories of other birthday
parties you have attended in the past
Confabulation is another way in which RM occurs in which recall of the event is impacted by distortion
of the information, fabrication of details (e.g. inserting details not present at the time of the event) and
misinterpretation of the information

What is the relevance of reconstructive memory & eyewitness

testimony?
When someone is present at a crime then they become an eyewitness (EW) to that crime; when they
give an account of what they saw and heard at the crime scene this is known as eyewitness testimony
(EWT)
EWs generally want to help the police - they have sincere intentions about telling the ‘truth, the whole
truth and nothing but the truth’ to the police who take their original EWT and in court when they are
acting as a witness (usually for the prosecution)
One of the reasons for EWT lacking accuracy is the very fact that EWs have this need to help: they may
work too hard to recall what they witnessed and in doing so they may fall prey to the manifestations of
RM outlined above (e.g. confabulation)
Another key – and highly researched – error when obtaining EWT is when leading questions are used by
the police (or in court – though this is officially not permitted)
A leading question is one in which the answer is contained in the question, there is the assumption
that there is one ‘true’ response to the question e.g. What attracted you to your billionaire
husband? i.e. the interviewer ‘leads’ the witness to the response

Page 4 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

A leading question is an example of information after the event as it provides an extra layer of
information to that which was witnessed at the scene, it may insert (or remove) key information that
could lead to the real culprit of the crime getting away with it (or even worse, to an innocent person Your notes
being convicted of the crime)
An example of a leading question is: So did you see him with the weapon? as opposed to ‘So did
you see him with a weapon?’;
The use of ‘the’ suggests that there definitely was a weapon (and that he must have been holding it)
whereas ‘a’ leaves it open as to there even being a weapon present at all
The police may not be aware that they are using leading questions with EWs but this is something that
they should address as juries tend to find EWT very compelling and in the absence of DNA evidence
they may use it to come to a verdict

It is crucial for justice to be done that eyewitnesses give testimony that is based on what they actually
witnessed rather than giving a reconstructed version of events.
Which research studies investigate reconstructive memory &
eyewitness testimony?
Loftus & Palmer (1974) – the use of leading questions has an effect on EWT

Page 5 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Loftus & Palmer (1974) is available as a separate Key Study – just navigate the Reliability of Cognitive
Processes section of this topic to find it (Two Key Studies of Reconstructive Memory)
Your notes

Examiner Tips and Tricks

Make sure that you keep the question topic in mind when you are answering exam questions. For
example, to qualify for the top mark band (7-9 marks) in an SAQ you need to focus fully on the
question, ensure that your knowledge and understanding is 100% accurate and that you use
relevant research

Worked Example
ERQ (Extended Response Question) - 22 marks
To what extent could memory be said to be reconstructive? [22]
The command term ‘To what extent’ requires you to offer arguments as to how far memory could be
said to be reconstructive but also to identify and discuss why this may not always be the case e.g.
because the research method used lacks ecological validity so cannot be a true reflection of real life
memory in action
Have a look at this paragraph for an example of how to use this command term for this essay:
Loftus and Palmer (1974) suggested a hypothesis of reconstructive memory to explain why true and
accurate recall of an event may become impaired and distorted. This explanation is as follows: a
person receives two sources of information regarding an event that they have witnessed – the first is
the information obtained from perceiving the event itself; the second is the information supplied or
acquired after the event. If there is some difference between the two sources, integration of post-
event information can lead to memory distortions. Loftus & Palmer’s research demonstrates how
external cues, such as leading questions, made available after an event, can affect an eyewitnesses’
subsequent memory of that event, suggesting that memory is reconstructive to a very great extent.

Page 6 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Two Key Studies of Reconstructive Memory: Bartlett (1932) & Loftus

& Palmer (1974) Your notes

Examiner Tips and Tricks

You can also use Bartlett (1932) to answer a question on Schema Theory. You could also use Loftus &
Palmer (1974) for a Schema Theory question but you would have to be very careful to focus your
response around the schematic activation which may have resulted due to the change of verb per
critical question. Students often mis-handle this study when they apply it to schema so it may be
better to use Riso et al. (2006) instead

Key Study: Bartlett (1932)

Aim: To investigate the effect of cultural schemas on reconstructive memory
Participants: 20 male undergraduate students from the University of Cambridge in the UK
Procedure: Bartlett instigated a procedure known as serial reproduction, in which one participant read the
story then reproduced it in writing; this was then read to a second person who then wrote his own memory
of the story which was then read to a third person who then produced his own version of the story and so
on.
Results: Bartlett found that the resulting stories bore little similarity to the original Native American folk tale.
The changes made by the participants included:
Omission: Key details of the story were ignored or missed out, particularly unfamiliar or unpleasant
details such as a contorted face or black coming out of a mouth. Participants even omitted the key
idea that ghosts were fighting which is surprising as this is the title of the story. Ghosts were soon
dropped from the re-telling of the story as they do not fit with the way that adult males see the world,
particularly in relation to war; details such as a contorted face were omitted as they may have caused
unpleasant memories.
Assimilation and sharpening: Story details were changed to suit the participants’ own cultural
schemas e.g. ‘canoes’ became ‘boats’; ‘paddling’ became ‘rowing’. Details such as the spirit wound
were re-interpreted as a flesh wound with words such as ‘therefore’ and ‘because’ inserted to explain
the events.
Levelling: The story became shorter - the original story was approximately 350 words and the
participants’ version was around 180 words
Conclusion: Cultural schemas contribute to the reconstructive nature of memory i.e. memory is not a
passive state in which events are recorded like a camera would record them, instead memory is an active

Page 7 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

process in which pre-existing information and expectations may interfere with the accuracy and reliability
of the memory
Your notes
Evaluation of Bartlett (1932)
Strengths
Bartlett’s study was one of the first pieces of research to highlight the role of schema in reconstructive
memory e.g. two people who witness the same event may give very different accounts of what they
have seen
Understanding the ways in which schemas may interfere with accurate recall of events has good
application to educational settings in terms of how learning takes place and to the criminal justice
system in terms of eye-witness testimony (see Loftus & Palmer 1972 below and the Revision Note on
Eye Witness Testimony)
Limitations
This is very dated research: university students in the UK are much more aware of wider multi-cultural
issues today than they were in the 1930s which means that the results may lack temporal validity
It is unclear as to whether the memory distortions were the product of schematic interference or to
other factors such as poor overall memory, lack of attention, personal learning styles (some people
are visual learners for example so an aural task would not suit them as much as viewing a cartoon of the
story)
Key terms:
Assimilation
Levelling
Reconstructive memory

Key Study: Loftus & Palmer (1974)

Aim: To investigate the effect of leading questions on eyewitness testimony (EWT)
Participants: 45 undergraduate students from the University of Washington, USA for Experiment 1; 150
participants from the same university for Experiment 2
Procedure: Two lab experiments which used an independent measures design for both Experiment 1 and
Experiment 2
Experiment 1: Participants were shown seven film clips of traffic accidents. After each film they filled in
a questionnaire based on what they had witnessed about the accident – the questionnaire included
several ‘filler’ questions and a critical question

Page 8 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

The critical question (independent variable) was: ‘About how fast were the cars going when they
smashed/hit/bumped/collided/contacted each other?’ Each participant was in one of the five
conditions i.e. each participant was asked only one of the critical questions containing only one of the Your notes
five verbs. Participants had to estimate the speed in miles per hour
Experiment 2: 150 participants divided into three groups of 50 each. All participants watched a one-
minute film of a multiple-car accident. They then answered some questions about the film
The critical question was, ‘How fast were the cars going when they hit/smashed each other?’ Each
participant was randomly allocated to either the ‘smashed’, ‘hit’ or control condition. The control
group were not asked any questions about the speed of the cars
The participants were asked to return a week later. They were asked several questions about the accident in
the film. The critical question was, ‘Did you see any broken glass?’ with the response being ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
There was not, in fact, any broken glass in the film
Results:
Experiment 1: Participants in the ‘smashed’ condition estimated the highest speed out of all the five
conditions at 40.8 mph; participants in the ‘contacted’ condition estimated the lowest speed out of all the
five conditions at 31.8 mph
Experiment 2: 43 participants in the ‘Smashed’ condition reported having seen broken glass as opposed to
7 participants reporting seeing broken glass in the ‘Hit’ condition
Conclusion: Leading questions may lead to unreliable EWT by providing information after the event

Evaluation of Loftus & Palmer (1974)

Strengths
This research has huge implications for the ways in which EWTs should be questioned hence it has great
application to the wider world
The standardised procedure and control of variables make this study easy to replicate which
increases its reliability
Limitations
Watching recorded footage of a traffic accident is not the same as experiencing the event in real life so
the study lacks ecological validity
The participants might have been prone to response bias - i.e. the emotive quality of the words may
have prompted the participants to think that a higher or lower speed estimate was expected of them
(e.g. ‘smashed’ sounds like it should be given a high estimate)
Key terms:
Eyewitness testimony
Information after the event

Page 9 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Response bias

Your notes

Examiner Tips and Tricks

If you are asked a 22-mark ERQ about the extent to which memory could be said to be
reconstructive remember that you are not being asked to only focus on the negative aspects of
research on this topic. You should give a balanced account, considering a range of arguments as
this is good critical thinking for any essay-type question

Page 10 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Cognitive Biases: Illusory Correlation

Your notes
Cognitive Biases: Illusory Correlation
What is cognitive bias?
A cognitive bias is a faulty or distorted way of perceiving or understanding the world
A cognitive bias is a kind of heuristic i.e. a short-cut way of thinking which minimises cognitive effort
and energy and maximises quick, easy solutions to problems and to decision-making
Cognitive biases are not the same as prejudice or discrimination, but it could be argued that they
contribute to the formation of stereotypes and to the establishment and perpetuation of limited,
sometimes harmful, problematic attitudes
Cognitive biases include (but are not limited to):
illusory correlation;
confirmation bias;
the availability heuristic;
anchoring bias;
the just-world hypothesis (which is covered in a separate Cognitive Bias Revision Note in the
Reliability of Cognitive Processes)
A cognitive bias has the characteristics of System 1 thinking (see the Revision Note on Thinking &
Decision-Making: the Dual Process Model included in Cognitive Processing) in that it is based on
intuitive, automatic thinking which requires little or no analysis or reflection

What is Illusory Correlation?

Illusory Correlation (IC) is a cognitive bias which occurs when people assume that there is a
relationship between two variables when in fact this relationship does not exist or is based on
stereotypical assumptions which lack tangible evidence
Some examples of everyday ICs are:
Blondes have more fun (the IC is the linking of hair colour and enjoyment of life);
Italians are highly excitable (the IC involves generalising a specific behaviour to a whole nation);
A gambler who believes that wearing their ‘lucky shirt’ will help them to win at the roulette table (the IC is
the belief that arbitrary factors such as clothing choice can have any influence over the outcome at a
gambling game)

Page 11 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

All ICs are not necessarily negative or harmful e.g. My right knee is aching which means that rain is on
the way, but some ICs can be at the root of bigoted behaviour such as racism, sexism, homophobia
etc. Your notes
One explanation for the development of ICs is the cognitive miser explanation: the world is a complex,
busy place and we are bombarded on a daily basis with a multitude of messages and information so
using ICs to understand the world means that less cognitive energy needs to be expended than if one
were to fully focus on the subtle and varied explanations for specific behaviours/types of people

A gambler may use illusory correlations in the mistaken belief that this will increase their winnings e.g.
always going to the same ‘lucky’ croupier’s table
Which research studies investigate illusory correlation?
Hamilton & Gifford (1976) – illusory correlation favours the majority rather than the minority in terms of
group size
Hamilton & Gifford (1976) is available as a separate Key Study – just navigate the Reliability of Cognitive
Processes section of this topic to find it (Two Key Studies of Cognitive Biases)
This study can also be found as part of the Sociological Approach topic Formation of Stereotypes which
you can find as a separate Revision Note on this site

Page 12 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Examiner Tips and Tricks

Illusory correlation and Hamilton & Gifford’s (1976) study is also relevant to the Sociological Your notes
Approach – The Individual & the Group – Formation of Stereotypes so you can ‘double up’ this study
for use with two separate exam questions. BUT if you use this study twice on the same exam, please
be sure to place the emphasis of your response on the cognitive bias if you are answering a
Cognitive Approach question or on the formation of stereotypes if you are answering a
Sociocultural Approach question

Worked Example
SAQ (Short answer question): 9 marks
Explain one theory of one cognitive bias using one relevant study. [9]
The command term ‘Explain’ requires you to give good detail and some depth of both the theory
and the supporting study.
Have a look at this paragraph for an example of how to use this command term for this SAQ:
Hamilton and Gifford (1976) use the theory of illusory correlation to explain how stereotypes
develop. Illusory correlation is when two events occur simultaneously, and incorrect inference is
drawn from this co-occurrence, particularly if the event or behaviour is notable or unusual. They
argued that negative behaviours are relatively rare, and that people from minority groups are also
relatively rare (because, logically, there are not as many of them as there are of the majority group),
so when one sees a minority person performing a negative act, it is more memorable than when one
sees a person from a majority group performing the same act.

Page 13 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Cognitive Biases: Just World Hypothesis

Your notes
Cognitive Biases: Just World Hypothesis
What is cognitive bias?
A cognitive bias is a faulty or distorted way of perceiving or understanding the world
A cognitive bias is a kind of heuristic i.e. a short-cut way of thinking which minimises cognitive effort
and energy and maximises quick, easy solutions to problems and to decision-making
Cognitive biases are not the same as prejudice or discrimination, but it could be argued that they
contribute to the formation of stereotypes and to the establishment and perpetuation of limited,
sometimes harmful, problematic attitudes
Cognitive biases include (but are not limited to)
illusory correlation;
confirmation bias;
the availability heuristic;
anchoring bias;
the just-world hypothesis (which is covered in a separate Cognitive Bias Revision Note in the
Reliability of Cognitive Processes)
A cognitive bias has the characteristics of System 1 thinking (see the Revision Note on Thinking &
Decision-Making: the Dual Process Model included in Cognitive Processing) in that it is based on
intuitive, automatic thinking which requires little or no analysis or reflection

What is the Just-World Hypothesis?

The Just-World Hypothesis (JWH), proposed by Lerner (1960) is a cognitive bias theory based on the
(mistaken) idea that the world is a fair place in which good people are rewarded and bad people are
punished (‘just’ i.e. that justice will be done)
The JWH can be explained in terms of people wishing to believe in a rational world which (to them at
least) makes sense because the alternative (that bad things do happen to good people) is a frightening
one to contemplate
The JWH is a factor in victim-blaming - i.e. if the world is a fair and just place then bad things should
only happen to bad people, so if someone is homeless then they’ve probably brought it on
themselves; if a woman is attacked then she probably encouraged the attack via her clothing or
behaviour; if someone collapses on the pavement then they’re probably drunk, it’s their own fault etc.

Page 14 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Victim-blaming also involves finding reasons not to help people who are not ‘worthy’ of help
because (according to the JWH) they have contributed to their own hardship or misfortune
Your notes
This can make the individual feel better about not helping them, as it eases the burden of guilt
The JWH may be explained as a means by which people avoid having to dwell on their own vulnerability
as potential victims of crime or disaster - i.e. hearing about increasing poverty levels in their own
country might lead to thoughts such as, "I work hard, that could never happen to me. Those people who
can’t pay their bills must be lazy."
The JWH may also be explained as a mechanism used to manage anxiety as it (mistakenly) enables the
individual to feel that the world is a safe place as long as they behave in a way which will protect them
from harm - i.e. by being a ‘good’ person

Is he drunk – or ill? And will this determine the type of help (if any) he is given?
Which research studies investigate the just-world hypothesis?
Piliavin et al. (1969) – the JWH is a factor in the type of victim who is given help (drunk or disabled)
Piliavin et al. (1969) is available as a separate Key Study – just navigate the Reliability of Cognitive Processes
section of this topic to find it (Two Key Studies of Cognitive Biases)

Examiner Tips and Tricks

The JWH and Piliavin et al.’s (1969) study are also relevant to the Year 2 Relationships topic (Social
Responsibility) so you can ‘double up’ this study for both Paper 1 and Paper 2 topics

Page 15 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Worked Example
ERQ (Extended Response Question) - 22 marks Your notes

Discuss one or more cognitive biases. [22]

This essay question requires you to examine research in the light of specific theories.
Have a look at these paragraphs for an example of how to analyse the theory and also how to
conclude an essay (something which students often struggle to do successfully):
The just-world hypothesis – that victim-blaming may account for the lack of help in the ‘drunk’
condition – may not be the only explanation for Piliavin et al.’s (1969) findings. An alternative
explanation might be that people are more likely to be wary of someone who appears to be drunk:
their behaviour may be unpredictable; they may turn violent; they may vomit, all of which may well
put people off helping them. Additionally, the ‘drunk’ condition was used on 38 trials compared to
the 65 trials for the ‘cane’ condition: if an equal number of trials had been used for each condition,
then the results would be more comparable. It is also possible that some participants may have
witnessed the procedure more than once as it was run on the same stretch of track over a period of
a few months which would give rise to demand characteristics possibly resulting in a disinclination
to help.
In conclusion there appears to be some strong evidence to suggest that the just-world hypothesis
is a key factor in victim-blaming as evidenced in the lower number of people who helped in the
‘drunk’ condition. Piliavin’s research does point to the just-world hypothesis as one valid
explanation of bystanderism based on type of victim and their ‘worthiness’ in terms of how much
people perceive that they have contributed to their own misfortune.

Page 16 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Two Key Studies of Cognitive Biases: Hamilton & Gifford (1976) &
Piliavin et al. (1969) Your notes

Examiner Tips and Tricks

You can also use Hamilton & Gifford (1976) to answer a question on the Formation of Stereotypes
(Sociocultural Approach) and you can use Piliavin et al. (1969) to answer a question on the Bystander
Effect (Relationships option in Year 2 of the IB Psychology course)

Key Study: Hamilton & Gifford (1976)

Aim: To investigate illusory correlation as a cognitive bias
Participants: 40 undergraduate students from a university in New York state, USA (20 males; 20 females)
Procedure:
The participants were presented with two hypothetical groups - i.e. these were not real groups
consisting of real people with given characteristics. The participants were told that Group A consisted
of 26 members and that Group B consisted of 13 members
The participants then read a series of statements which each described a particular behaviour
performed by either a member of A or B e.g. John, a member of A, visited a friend in hospital
The behaviours described in the statements were classified as either desirable or undesirable. Both A
and B were assigned more positive than negative behaviours at a ratio of 9:4 (positive to negative) and
two thirds of the statements overall were attributed to members of A
Thus, members of A were presented as performing more behaviours overall than B and positive
behaviours were more frequent from both groups than negative behaviours
The participants were then asked to provide ratings for the following measures:
1. Given a list of 20 attributes, assign each to either group A or B
2. Given a particular example of a behaviour, say whether this behaviour was performed by a member of A
or B
3. Estimate how many negative behaviours can be attributed to either A or B
Results: The mean scores showed that participants attributed more desirable social behaviours (6.7) to
members of Group A than to members of Group B (6.0); undesirable social behaviours were attributed
more to Group B (5.6) than to Group A (4.4)

Page 17 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

Conclusion: The results suggest that illusory correlation may be based on group size: the smaller group, B,
appears more distinctive than the larger group A so that any undesirable behaviours are linked more often
to the minority group, B, than to the majority group A. This has implications in terms of how minority groups Your notes
are viewed by society

Evaluation of Hamilton & Gifford (1976)

Strengths
The measures (rating scales) used in the study could be cross-referenced by the researchers to check
for consistency across them which should ensure both reliability and internal validity
The findings could be used to inform awareness-raising as a means to reduce prejudice and increase
tolerance of minority groups
Limitations
The procedure does not fully reflect how people respond in real-life situations where they are exposed
to minority groups which reduces ecological validity
The study is rather simplistic in its use of statements about hypothetical people and situations which
makes it difficult to draw very meaningful conclusions from the findings
Key terms:
Illusory correlation
Minority
Majority

Key Study: Piliavin et al. (1969)

Aim: To investigate the degree of help given to a victim who appeared to be either drunk or disabled
Participants: A field experiment which used an opportunity sample of 4,450 passengers (55% white; 45%
black) using the New York subway between Harlem and The Bronx during the hours of 11am until 3pm over
the course of several months. The journey lasted 7.5 minutes without any stops
Procedure:
A staged (fake) procedure which was conducted inside one carriage of the aforementioned
Harlem/Bronx subway route. 4 confederates were used: 2 females as observers, 1 white male aged 24
– 29 to model helping behaviour and 1 male victim aged 26 – 35 (either white or black, dressed
identically; the ‘drunk’ victim smelled of alcohol and the ‘cane’ victim had a cane to indicate that he
was disabled)
103 trials were conducted by alternating teams of researchers over the total course of the research’s
duration

Page 18 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

The female confederates took seats and kept notes, while the male victim and male model stood near
a pole in the centre of the train
Your notes
After passing the first station (approximately 70 seconds into the journey) the victim collapsed
In the “no help” condition, the model did nothing until the train slowed to a stop, and then helped the
victim to his feet
In the “helping” condition, the model came to the victim’s assistance
The collapse occurred in what the researchers referred to as the critical area which was in the
immediate vicinity of the victim
There were four different helping conditions used in both “drunk” and “cane” situations:
1. Critical area early: the model stood in the critical area and waited approximately 70 seconds after the
collapse to help
2. Critical area late: the model stood in the critical area and waited approximately 150 seconds after the
collapse to help
3. Adjacent area early: the model stood a little further way, adjacent to the critical area and waited
approximately 70 seconds after the collapse then helped the victim
4. Adjacent area late: the model stood a little further way, adjacent to the critical area and waited
approximately 150 seconds after the collapse then helped the victim
Results: The victim in the ‘cane’ condition received spontaneous help on 95% of the trials (62 out of 65
times) - i.e. there was very little need for the model to help first; people helped the apparently disabled man
immediately upon his collapse. The ‘drunk’ condition received help on 50% of the trials (19 out of 38 times)
Conclusion: The results support the Just-World Hypothesis as the victim in the ‘cane’ condition was helped
50% more than the victim who appeared to be drunk. It is possible that
people operate a system of judgement when deciding who to give help to - i.e. does the victim ‘deserve’
help or not?

Evaluation of Piliavin et al. (1969)

Strengths
The study is high in ecological validity due to the use of the natural setting and unartificial behaviour of
the naïve participants
The use of two observers should ensure inter-rater reliability
Limitations
The procedure is likely to have been affected by a range of extraneous variables that were impossible
to control e.g. individual differences such as personality and mood; some of the participants

Page 19 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers
 Head to www.savemyexams.com for more awesome resources

experiencing the procedure more than once if they used that route regularly; participants in the
carriage obscuring the view of the observers
The ethics of the study are problematic: no informed consent; deception of participants; possible Your notes
psychological harm; no right to withdraw or debriefing
Key terms:
Just-World hypothesis
Field experiment
Confederates

Examiner Tips and Tricks

With a study such as Piliavin et al. (1969) do ensure that you have learnt all of the parts of the study in
as much detail as possible: it is not often that field experiments feature in your IB Psychology course
and this particular one offers a wealth of potential critical thinking points.
For example, the study generated both quantitative (in the form of number of helpers) and
qualitative data (in the form of passenger’s comments and body language) and used a standardised
procedure in a natural setting which is a very difficult task to undertake and one which not many
other researchers have managed to match

Page 20 of 20
© 2015-2025 Save My Exams, Ltd. · Revision Notes, Topic Questions, Past Papers