| Course | SBS 105 Introduction to Psychology |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Memory and cognition paper |
| Length | About 1,105 words, 7 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Psychology and Addiction Studies |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for SBS 105 Module 5
Smashed or Bumped? How Memory Rebuilds a Parking Garage Collision, and Why Two Honest Witnesses Disagree
Student Name
Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University
SBS 105: Introduction to Psychology
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Smashed or Bumped? How Memory Rebuilds a Parking Garage Collision, and Why Two Honest Witnesses Disagree
On a Saturday afternoon, a sedan backing out of a space in a downtown parking garage struck a parked pickup truck. Two shoppers walking to the elevator saw it happen. The next week, an insurance adjuster interviewed both. The first, Elena, said the sedan smashed into the truck and remembered broken glass on the ground. The second, Marcus, said the sedan barely tapped the bumper and that nothing broke. The repair estimate showed a dented bumper and no broken glass. The adjuster wondered whether Elena was exaggerating to help the truck's owner, whom she had met in the elevator. Psychology suggests a different explanation: both witnesses were likely honest, and their memories had simply been rebuilt in different ways. Elena, Marcus and the collision are invented; the research is real.
How Memory Works
Psychologists describe memory in three stages. Encoding is the process of getting information into memory, which depends heavily on attention: details that were not noticed are not encoded. Storage is the retention of encoded information over time. Retrieval is the process of bringing stored information back into awareness. For a long time, people imagined memory as a kind of recording, with retrieval as playback. Research has shown instead that memory is reconstructive. Each time we remember, we rebuild the event from stored fragments, filling gaps with general knowledge, expectations and information encountered after the event. The rebuilt memory then becomes what is stored, so memories can change with each retrieval.
How a Single Word Changes a Memory
Loftus and Palmer (1974) demonstrated how information after an event can shape memory. In one experiment, students watched short films of traffic accidents and then estimated the cars' speed at the moment of impact, in a question that used the verb hit. For different groups, the verb was changed to smashed, collided, bumped or contacted. Students who heard smashed estimated higher speeds than those who heard contacted. In a second experiment, students watched a collision film and were asked about speed using either smashed or hit; a control group was not asked about speed. A week later, without seeing the film again, everyone was asked a yes or no question about broken glass in the film. There had been none. Students who had heard smashed were more than twice as likely as the others to say they had seen broken glass.
The experiment explains much of Elena's account. In the elevator, the truck's owner said, "Did you see him smash into my truck?" That word, encountered minutes after the event, became part of what Elena rebuilt when she later remembered it, along with the glass that such a crash would usually produce.
Memories of Events That Never Happened
Loftus and Pickrell (1995) went further, asking whether suggestion could create memories of whole events. They gave adults booklets describing four childhood events, three that relatives confirmed had happened and one, getting lost in a shopping mall, that had not. Participants wrote what they remembered about each and were interviewed twice over the following weeks. About a quarter of participants came to remember the false event, fully or partially, sometimes adding details of their own. The study showed that memory is not only distorted at the edges but can incorporate entire events suggested by trusted sources.
Elena's case is milder: she witnessed the collision. But the study helps explain why her memory of glass felt as real to her as anything else she remembered.
When Confidence Means Something
These findings might suggest that eyewitness memory is hopeless. Wixted and Wells (2017) reviewed the research on the relationship between a witness's confidence and the accuracy of their identification of a suspect. They concluded that the relationship depends on conditions. When a witness's memory is tested for the first time under fair conditions, such as a properly conducted lineup by someone who does not know which person is the suspect, high confidence is a strong indicator of accuracy and low confidence a strong indicator of error. But confidence expressed later, after repeated questioning, feedback or exposure to other information, can grow without any gain in accuracy, and should be given little weight.
Applied to the garage, the most useful evidence would be what each witness said, and how sure each felt, at the very first moment of recall, before talking to the truck's owner or to each other. By the time the adjuster interviewed them a week later, both memories had been rebuilt several times.
Where Memory Goes Wrong
| Stage | What happens | Error it invites | In the garage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Encoding | Attention selects what is stored | Unattended details are never stored | Marcus watched the sedan; Elena was looking for the elevator |
| Storage | Fragments are retained | Fragments fade and blur with similar memories | Both had seen many fender-benders before |
| Retrieval | The event is rebuilt from fragments and current information | Later words and expectations enter the memory | Elena heard smash in the elevator |
| Re-storage | The rebuilt version replaces the original | Each retelling can change the memory further | Elena told the story to friends twice before the interview |
Thinking About the Evidence
The case also touches on thinking. The adjuster's first explanation, that Elena was lying, reflects a common tendency to explain others' behavior through their character rather than their circumstances. A more careful line of reasoning considers what each witness saw, what they heard afterward and how memory works, then weighs the physical evidence, which supported Marcus. Good thinking about memory evidence relies on information that does not depend on memory, such as photographs and repair records, whenever it is available.
Practical Steps
The research suggests several steps for anyone who witnesses an event that may matter later. Write down or record what you saw as soon as possible, before talking with others. Note how sure you feel about each detail at that first moment. Avoid discussing the event with other witnesses before giving an account, since their words can enter your memory. And people who ask witnesses questions should use neutral wording, such as asking what happened rather than how hard the cars smashed.
Conclusion
Elena and Marcus disagreed not because one lied but because memory rebuilds events each time they are recalled. Loftus and Palmer showed that a single word can change what people report and later remember, Loftus and Pickrell showed that suggestion can create memories of whole events, and Wixted and Wells showed that a witness's first, fairly tested confidence can still be informative. Understanding memory as reconstruction helps people judge memory evidence more fairly and protect their own memories when it matters.
References
Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13(5), 585-589. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80011-3
Loftus, E. F., & Pickrell, J. E. (1995). The formation of false memories. Psychiatric Annals, 25(12), 720-725. https://doi.org/10.3928/0048-5713-19951201-07
Wixted, J. T., & Wells, G. L. (2017). The relationship between eyewitness confidence and identification accuracy: A new synthesis. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 18(1), 10-65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616686966
SBS 105 Module 5 instructions, in plain terms
The fifth module of SBS 105 deals with memory and thinking, and the paper often asks students to explain how memory works and apply research to an everyday memory question. Defer to the Module 5 page in your classroom; the witnesses here are invented. Explain encoding, storage and retrieval in clear terms. Explain why memory is reconstructive rather than a recording. Describe research on memory distortion accurately. Apply it to a specific situation. Offer practical conclusions supported by evidence, with each study cited in APA 7 style. Describe each study closely enough, with the wording or task participants saw, that a reader could picture what was done.
How the SBS 105 Module 5 example is put together
Two shoppers saw a sedan back into a pickup at walking speed in a parking garage. One told the adjuster the sedan smashed into the truck and remembered glass on the ground; the other said the sedan barely tapped it. The paper explains encoding, storage and retrieval and the idea that remembering rebuilds an event from stored fragments and current information. Loftus and Palmer (Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior) show how a single word in a question shapes what people report and later remember. Loftus and Pickrell (Psychiatric Annals) show that suggestion can create memories of whole events. Wixted and Wells (Psychological Science in the Public Interest) explain when confidence tells us something about accuracy. A table matches each memory stage to the errors it invites. The advice includes writing down what one saw before talking to others and noting how sure one feels at that first moment.
Reading the SBS 105 Module 5 grading rubric
Memory papers in introductory psychology earn credit for explaining the stages of memory correctly and for showing how research explains real memory errors. This example defines encoding, storage and retrieval and then uses the reconstructive view to explain the disagreement without accusing either witness of lying. Each study is described with its method and result, including the specific wording and percentages that make the findings concrete. Wixted and Wells add nuance, showing that memory is not hopelessly unreliable and that the conditions of recall matter. The practical steps follow from the research, which shows understanding. The paper also considers the adjuster's reasoning, connecting memory to the thinking side of the module.
SBS 105 Module 5 help from the desk
Memory papers often describe memory as a recording that sometimes fails, which misses the central finding that remembering rebuilds events. Explain reconstruction clearly. Another weakness is reporting famous studies vaguely; give the wording, the groups and what changed. Avoid overcorrecting into the claim that memory is useless; research shows when it is more and less reliable. Apply the research to the specific details in your example. Finally, offer advice that follows from the studies, such as recording memories early, rather than general tips. Show the reader where in your example each piece of advice would have made a difference.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More SBS 105 and Psychology and Addiction Studies sample papers
- SBS 105 Module 1: Psychology as a Science
- SBS 105 Module 2: The Biology of Behavior
- SBS 105 Module 3: Sensation, Perception and Consciousness
- SBS 105 Module 4: Learning
- SBS 105 Module 6: Development, Motivation and Emotion
- SBS 105 Module 7: Personality and Psychological Disorders
- SBS 105 Module 8: Social Psychology
- PAC 310 Module 3: Confidentiality of SUD Records
- SBS 200 Module 4: Adolescence
- PAC 115 Module 1: Roots, Prefixes and Suffixes
- PAC 415 Module 8: Reflection on Practical Wisdom
SBS 105 Module 5 questions, answered
What does SBS 105 Module 5 usually ask for?
Aspen's SBS 105 covers memory and thinking in this module, so explaining how memory works and applying research to an everyday memory question is typical. Check your Module 5 prompt.
Is memory like a video recording?
No. Memories are rebuilt each time they are recalled, from stored fragments and current information, so they can change.
Can a question change what someone remembers?
Yes. Loftus and Palmer found that the verb used in a question changed speed estimates and memories of broken glass.
Where can I find a free SBS 105 Module 5 sample paper?
It is posted above at no cost: a memory paper explaining why two invented witnesses to a parking garage collision disagree.
Does a witness's confidence mean they are right?
Wixted and Wells found that confidence at a first, fairly conducted identification can signal accuracy, but confidence that grows later does not.