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

Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error00:59

Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error

An experiment often consists of more than a single step. In this case, measurements at each step give rise to uncertainty. Because the measurements occur in successive steps, the uncertainty in one step necessarily contributes to that in the subsequent step. As we perform statistical analysis on these types of experiments, we must learn to account for the propagation of uncertainty from one step to the next. The propagation of uncertainty depends on the type of arithmetic operation performed on...
The Scientific Method01:32

The Scientific Method

The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
The Scientific Method03:50

The Scientific Method

Chemistry is an empirical science. Scientists often pose questions to understand the chemistry in everyday life and seek answers to these questions. To achieve this, scientists follow a definitive series of steps that together make up the Scientific Method. This approach involves making observations, asking questions, building a hypothesis, conducting experiments, analyzing results, and forming a conclusion.
The Scientific Method02:40

The Scientific Method

Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.
Statistical Significance01:37

Statistical Significance

Once data is collected from both the experimental and the control groups, a statistical analysis is conducted to find out if there are meaningful differences between the two groups. A statistical analysis determines how likely any difference found is due to chance (and thus not meaningful). In psychology, group differences are considered meaningful, or significant, if the odds that these differences occurred by chance alone are 5 percent or less. Stated another way, if we repeated this...
Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?01:17

Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?

The outcome of any hypothesis testing leads to rejecting or not rejecting the null hypothesis. This decision is taken based on the analysis of the data, an appropriate test statistic, an appropriate confidence level, the critical values, and P-values. However, when the evidence suggests that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected, is it right to say, 'Accept' the null hypothesis?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null hypothesis and 'fail to...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Using Serious Games to Increase the Implementation of Trauma Triage Guidelines: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

JAMA·2026
Same author

Clinicians' Approaches to Prognostication After Traumatic Brain Injury and Cardiac Arrest: A Multi-Hospital, Qualitative Study.

Neurocritical care·2026
Same author

Correction: Cross-sectional validation of the PROMIS-Preference scoring system.

PloS one·2025
Same author

An Educational Video Game in Trauma Triage at Nontrauma Centers: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

JAMA network open·2025
Same author

Recovery Potential in Patients After Cardiac Arrest Who Die After Limitations or Withdrawal of Life Support.

JAMA network open·2025
Same author

Public Understanding of Risk and Benefit of Mifepristone: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

JAMA network open·2025
Same journal

Testing the predictions of a distinctiveness model of memory: The production effect in backward recall.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

On the impact of adjacency on transposed-word effects under serial presentation.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

It's time to opt out: Metacognitive analysis of time regulation under uncertainty.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

The role of statistical learning in attentional guidance during search through naturalistic scenes.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

Representing objects and features in long-term memory: A case for direct feature-feature binding.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

Crossmodal correspondences influence adaptation during rule-based category learning of objects.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 9, 2026

Experimental Research Examining How People Can Cope with Uncertainty Through Soft Haptic Sensations
09:07

Experimental Research Examining How People Can Cope with Uncertainty Through Soft Haptic Sensations

Published on: September 16, 2015

Communicating uncertain experimental evidence.

Alexander L Davis1, Baruch Fischhoff2

  • 1Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University.

Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition
|July 31, 2013
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Laypeople are more likely to blame unexpected experimental results on errors when viewing them in hindsight. Considering potential causes beforehand can improve how unexpected findings are evaluated and communicated later.

More Related Videos

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
13:04

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods

Published on: September 19, 2012

Characterization of Complex Systems Using the Design of Experiments Approach: Transient Protein Expression in Tobacco as a Case Study
20:24

Characterization of Complex Systems Using the Design of Experiments Approach: Transient Protein Expression in Tobacco as a Case Study

Published on: January 31, 2014

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 9, 2026

Experimental Research Examining How People Can Cope with Uncertainty Through Soft Haptic Sensations
09:07

Experimental Research Examining How People Can Cope with Uncertainty Through Soft Haptic Sensations

Published on: September 16, 2015

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
13:04

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods

Published on: September 19, 2012

Characterization of Complex Systems Using the Design of Experiments Approach: Transient Protein Expression in Tobacco as a Case Study
20:24

Characterization of Complex Systems Using the Design of Experiments Approach: Transient Protein Expression in Tobacco as a Case Study

Published on: January 31, 2014

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Scientific Communication

Background:

  • Laypeople evaluate experimental outcomes differently depending on whether they consider them in foresight or hindsight.
  • Attribution of unexpected results to error and decisions about data publication are key aspects of scientific evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate how laypeople attribute unexpected experimental outcomes to error.
  • To examine the influence of foresight versus hindsight on these attributions.
  • To understand how these factors affect judgments about publishing experimental data.

Main Methods:

  • Four experiments were conducted using hypothetical vignettes of scientific studies.
  • Participants evaluated experimental results presented either as possibilities (foresight) or realities (hindsight).
  • Unexpected versus expected outcomes were contrasted, and explanations for unexpected results were introduced either before or after their revelation.

Main Results:

  • Unexpected results were more frequently attributed to methodological problems than expected results, with no difference between foresight and hindsight.
  • An explanation for an unexpected outcome increased confidence when presented before the outcome was known.
  • Most participants recommended further data collection before publication, particularly when multiple causes were considered.

Conclusions:

  • Attributing unexpected results to error occurs similarly in foresight and hindsight.
  • Proactively considering potential causes for unexpected findings may enhance their evaluation and subsequent communication.
  • The timing of explanation influences confidence in understanding unexpected experimental outcomes.