Sacchi et al. (2007)

Specification

Sacchi et al. (2007) Changing history: doctored photographs affect memory for past public events.

Outline

Aim(s)

To investigate whether doctored photographs of two well know events could change a person’s memories of an event.
To find out if viewing doctored images would change the attitudes a person has towards a past event.
To investigate if viewing doctored images of a past event could change behavioural intentions in the future.

Procedure

Sample: 187 participants (31 male and 156 female) who were undergraduates (92% Psychology, 8% other) enrolled at the University of Padua or at the University of Udine, in Italy. The age range was 19–39 (mean age 22.3 years). Participants did not receive any compensation for involvement.

To represent the Beijing event a well-known image of a student standing in front of tanks in Tiananmen Square was used. For the Rome event, a photograph depicting peaceful demonstrators marching in front of the Coliseum was used.

A doctored version of each original photograph was created using Microsoft Picture It! Photo 2001.

For the Beijing event, a conspicuous crowd was added on both sides of the line of tanks. In the photograph for the Rome event, police officers and aggressive-looking demonstrators were placed among the peaceful crowds.

To ensure the doctored Rome photo conveyed violence, two versions were presented to eight independent judges, who rated each image on a peaceful–violent scale. The version rated more violent was selected for the experiment.

Participants viewed one combination of the photographs for the Beijing event and the Rome event, either the original or doctored version.

There were four possible combinations counterbalanced and randomised when presented:

two original photos (N=48)
two doctored photos (N=44)
the doctored Beijing photo and original Rome photo (N=43)
the original Beijing photo and doctored Rome photo (N=52)

Three sets of multiple-choice questions were used: manipulation check questions, critical questions and attitude questions.

Photographs and questions were presented in a printed questionnaire that participants completed in large groups in classroom settings. No information about the experiment was given.

On the first page participants saw both photographs then answered the question ‘Can you tell what major public event of the past 15 years is depicted in each of the following photos?’ in a blank space next to each image.

On the next page, one of the two photographs appeared again, this time accompanied by a caption indicating the event and when it took place. On this page, participants also found the manipulation check questions and two short filler exercises.

Manipulation check questions assessed if photographs were believable and participant familiarity with the events. They indicated whether they had already seen the photograph and rated how familiar they were with the event.

On the next page, participants responded based on their memories of the event (being asked not to look back at the photograph). They were then presented with the critical questions specific for that event and the attitude questions.

Critical questions addressed aspects of participant memories that could be biased by the content of the doctored photographs.

Attitude questions tested whether the doctored material could affect attitudes towards the events, for example rating violence.

Finally, a blank page was left for participants to add their comments or to point out aspects of the event that they had found particularly striking.

During the debriefing, participants saw both the original and the doctored version of each photograph, and the real purpose of the study was revealed. Results Table 1 shows the results of the manipulation check by participant response.

Beijing event: Participants in the two conditions were equally likely to recognise the photograph, regardless of whether the version had been modified or not. Ratings of familiarity with the Beijing event did not differ between the two conditions.

When asked critical questions, the participants who viewed the altered material produced higher estimates of the number of people that took part in the Beijing event and how many people were near the tanks.

Attitude questions showed mean ratings on the peaceful–violent and positive–negative scales did not differ between the two conditions.

Rome event: participants who viewed the original version were more likely to recognise the photo than those who saw the doctored version. Ratings of familiarity with also differed with ratings of high familiarity selected by 73.6% of the participants in the original condition, but by 51.6% in the doctored condition.

The critical questions focused on violence. Participants were asked if any physical confrontation occurred between the demonstrators and the law enforcement, if any property was damaged and how many people were injured.

Those exposed to the altered photograph were more likely to respond ‘Yes’ to all three questions. For example, 34% of those who saw the original claimed there were injuries, but 67% of those who saw the doctored photograph claimed injuries occurred.

Participants who viewed the doctored photo rated the event significantly more violent and they rated the Rome event significantly more negative, than those who saw the original.

Study 2

To test the hypothesis that the exposure to a doctored photograph of a past public event could affect people’s behavioural intentions a second study was conducted.

A total of 112 participants (35 male, 73 females, 4 did not specify gender) enrolled at University in Italy. The age range was 50–84 (mean age 64.9). About 56% of the participants were retired, 20% were still working and the remaining 24% did not indicate their occupation. Participants did not receive any kind of compensation for involvement.

The same photographs from Experiment 1 were used as stimulus material and participants viewed only one of four possible combinations (as in the first experiment). The questions were the same, however one question was added for the Rome event to rate how likely they would be to take part in a similar demonstration.

Results showed that in comparison to participants who viewed the original photograph of Rome, when asked if they would take part in a similar demonstration those who saw the doctored photograph gave significantly lower ratings compared to participants in the original condition.

Conclusions

Viewing modified images affected not only the way people remember past public events, but also their attitudes and behavioural intentions. The effect was similar for younger and older adults, regardless of whether the specific events were recent enough to be remembered first hand.

The authenticity of doctored images may have led participants to engage in the reconstructive process of remembering and to retrieve bits of information that were consistent with the misleading suggestion.

According to these findings, anybody intending to deceive people and affect their opinion by circulating such material would have a good chance of being successful.

Overall, it raises the question that if viewing false pictures during the retrieval stage affects recollection of well-known events, what happens when we are exposed to misleading material when we first learn about a new event?

Evaluation

Sacchi et al. (2007) used more females than males which is not representative of the wider population. The sample consisted of 187 undergraduates, of which 31 were male and 156 were female, with an age range of 19 to 39 and a mean age of 22.3 years. It is gender biased, limiting generalisability
The original photographs were real-life events. Two well-known photographs were used, such as the Beijing image of a student standing in front of tanks in Tiananmen Square. This increases task validity as images of events are commonly used to record events
Participants completed ratings of the photographs using three sets of multiple choice questionnaires including manipulation checks, critical questions and attitude questions. When completing the self-report questionnaires participants may not have given valid answers about their attitudes due to social desirability to give socially acceptable views of the historic event.
Participants viewed either two original photos, two doctored photos, the doctored Beijing photo and original Rome photo, the original Beijing photo and doctored Rome photo. By randomising the combinations of the photographs order effects can be eliminated, such as fatigue which may influence ability to concentrate on the image.

Past Paper Questions

1 Marker

State one aim from your contemporary study. (1) October 2017

2 Markers

Explain one weakness of your contemporary study. (2) October 2017
Describe the sample of participants from your chosen contemporary study. (2) October 2019
Describe the results from your chosen contemporary study. (2) October 2019

3 Marker

Describe the procedure of your chosen contemporary study. (3) October 2018

4 Markers

Explain one strength and one weakness of this contemporary study. (4) October 2018
Explain two weaknesses, other than the sample of participants, of your chosen contemporary study. (4) October 2019

8 Marker

Evaluate your chosen contemporary study. (8) January 2020

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse