Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value.
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation01:19

Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation

A complete procedure to test a claim about population standard deviation or population variance is explained here.
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

"What happens when you get corona?": Children's questions and parental responses about the COVID-19 pandemic.

PloS one·2025
Same author

Children's questions and teachers' responses about COVID-19 in Türkiye and the US.

PloS one·2024
Same author

Better than Goodenough? Evaluating new computational techniques for finding diagnostic structure in children's drawings.

Memory & cognition·2024
Same author

Deterministic or probabilistic: U.S. children's beliefs about genetic inheritance.

Child development·2024
Same author

Human perception and machine vision reveal rich latent structure in human figure drawings.

Frontiers in psychology·2023
Same author

Parent Coaching Fidelity Trajectories of In-Person and Telehealth Sessions during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Evidence-based practice in child and adolescent mental health·2022

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 13, 2026

Measuring the Functional Abilities of Children Aged 3-6 Years Old with Observational Methods and Computer Tools
11:29

Measuring the Functional Abilities of Children Aged 3-6 Years Old with Observational Methods and Computer Tools

Published on: June 20, 2020

Individual differences in children's production of scale errors.

Karl S Rosengren1, Stevie S Schein, Isabel T Gutiérrez

  • 1Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208, United States. k-rosengren@northwestern.edu

Infant Behavior & Development
|April 20, 2010
PubMed
Summary

Most young children (18-29 months) exhibit scale errors, demonstrating large individual differences in frequency and persistence. Extended exposure to replica toys initially increased scale errors, but overall frequency declined over time.

More Related Videos

Measuring Statistical Learning Across Modalities and Domains in School-Aged Children Via an Online Platform and Neuroimaging Techniques
08:05

Measuring Statistical Learning Across Modalities and Domains in School-Aged Children Via an Online Platform and Neuroimaging Techniques

Published on: June 30, 2020

Experimental Paradigm for Measuring the Effects of Self-distancing in Young Children
07:01

Experimental Paradigm for Measuring the Effects of Self-distancing in Young Children

Published on: March 1, 2019

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 13, 2026

Measuring the Functional Abilities of Children Aged 3-6 Years Old with Observational Methods and Computer Tools
11:29

Measuring the Functional Abilities of Children Aged 3-6 Years Old with Observational Methods and Computer Tools

Published on: June 20, 2020

Measuring Statistical Learning Across Modalities and Domains in School-Aged Children Via an Online Platform and Neuroimaging Techniques
08:05

Measuring Statistical Learning Across Modalities and Domains in School-Aged Children Via an Online Platform and Neuroimaging Techniques

Published on: June 30, 2020

Experimental Paradigm for Measuring the Effects of Self-distancing in Young Children
07:01

Experimental Paradigm for Measuring the Effects of Self-distancing in Young Children

Published on: March 1, 2019

Area of Science:

  • Developmental Psychology
  • Child Behavior

Background:

  • Scale errors, where children attempt to fit objects into inappropriately sized containers or use them in unintended ways, are common in early development.
  • Previous research has primarily documented scale errors in laboratory settings.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate individual differences in the production and persistence of scale errors in young children within a naturalistic preschool environment.
  • To confirm the prevalence of scale errors in a setting different from prior research.

Main Methods:

  • Children aged 18-29 months were observed in a laboratory preschool over 10 weeks.
  • Miniature replica toys were introduced into the classrooms during three 20-minute observation periods.
  • The frequency and persistence of scale errors were recorded.

Main Results:

  • The majority of children (88%) committed scale errors, confirming their prevalence in a naturalistic setting.
  • Significant individual differences were observed in how often and how long children committed scale errors.
  • Initial extended exposure to replica items led to an increase in scale errors, but the overall frequency decreased throughout the observation period.

Conclusions:

  • Scale errors are a common behavior in toddlers, with substantial variation among individuals.
  • Environmental exposure can influence the occurrence of scale errors, though a general decrease in frequency suggests habituation or learning.
  • This study validates previous findings and extends the understanding of scale error dynamics in a preschool context.