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

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

11.1K
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...
11.1K
Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

13.8K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
13.8K
Random Error01:04

Random Error

9.8K
Random or indeterminate errors originate from various uncontrollable variables, such as variations in environmental conditions, instrument imperfections, or the inherent variability of the phenomena being measured. Usually, these errors cannot be predicted, estimated, or characterized because their direction and magnitude often vary in magnitude and direction even during consecutive measurements. As a result, they are difficult to eliminate. However, the aggregate effect of these errors can be...
9.8K
Margin of Error01:27

Margin of Error

7.7K
The margin of error is also called the maximum error of an estimate. The margin of error is the maximum possible or expected difference between the observed sample parameter value and the actual population parameter value. For proportion, it is the maximum difference between the value of sample proportion obtained from the data and the true value of population proportion. As the true value of the population parameter is not known, the margin of error is calculated using the sample statistic.
7.7K
Standard Error of the Mean01:13

Standard Error of the Mean

12.5K
The sampling variability of a statistic is defined as how much the statistic varies from one sample to another. The sampling variability of a statistic is typically measured by measuring its standard error.
The standard error of the mean is an example of a standard error. It is a unique standard deviation known as the standard deviation of the sampling distribution of the mean. The standard error of the mean is a statistic that calculates how correctly a sample distribution represents a...
12.5K
Contaminants and Errors01:16

Contaminants and Errors

385
Effective sample preparation is crucial for accurate and reliable laboratory analysis. During this process, two significant sources of error can arise: concentration bias from improper sample splitting and contamination caused by methods used to reduce particle size, such as grinding or homogenization. Identifying and minimizing these potential errors is crucial to ensuring the validity of the analysis.
Another key consideration is determining the appropriate number of samples required to...
385

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Linear distance modulates P600 amplitude for gender agreement: An ERP study in Norwegian.

Brain research·2026
Same author

Highly replicable multisite patterns of adolescent white matter maturation.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
Same author

Similarities (and Differences) in the Learning Patterns of Single-Word Reading of an Alphabetic Orthography in Monolingual and Bilingual Primary School Children: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Brain sciences·2026
Same author

Speech onset time at home or in the lab: The role of testing environment and experimenter presence.

Behavior research methods·2026
Same author

A software ecosystem for brain tractometry processing, analysis, and insight.

PLoS computational biology·2025
Same author

Are you talking to me? How the choice of speech register impacts listeners' hierarchical encoding of speech.

Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 11, 2026

Ultrasound Images of the Tongue: A Tutorial for Assessment and Remediation of Speech Sound Errors
08:32

Ultrasound Images of the Tongue: A Tutorial for Assessment and Remediation of Speech Sound Errors

Published on: January 3, 2017

23.3K

Not all errors are the same: ERP sensitivity to error typicality in foreign accented speech perception.

Sendy Caffarra1, Clara D Martin2

  • 1BCBL, Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, Donostia-San Sebastian, Spain.

Cortex; a Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior
|April 17, 2018
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Native listeners process speech differently based on accent and error frequency. Common errors in foreign-accented speech trigger early brain responses, while uncommon errors elicit later processing.

Keywords:
ERPForeign accentMorphosyntaxSentence comprehension

More Related Videos

Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody
09:09

Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody

Published on: September 27, 2024

893
Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

9.3K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 11, 2026

Ultrasound Images of the Tongue: A Tutorial for Assessment and Remediation of Speech Sound Errors
08:32

Ultrasound Images of the Tongue: A Tutorial for Assessment and Remediation of Speech Sound Errors

Published on: January 3, 2017

23.3K
Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody
09:09

Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody

Published on: September 27, 2024

893
Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

9.3K

Area of Science:

  • Psycholinguistics
  • Neuroscience
  • Sociolinguistics

Background:

  • Globalization increases intercultural communication, necessitating understanding of non-native speech.
  • Listeners encounter various grammatical errors in foreign-accented language.
  • Error typicality (common vs. uncommon) may influence speech processing.

Purpose of the Study:

  • Investigate how native listeners process morphosyntactic errors in foreign-accented speech.
  • Determine sensitivity to error typicality in intercultural communication.
  • Examine neural responses (Event-Related Potentials) to different error types and accents.

Main Methods:

  • Spanish native speakers listened to Spanish sentences with native and English accents.
  • Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) were recorded.
  • Morphosyntactic violations included common (gender) and uncommon (number) errors.

Main Results:

  • Sentence comprehension accuracy was similar across accents.
  • Native accent errors (gender, number) elicited Late Positive Potential (P600).
  • Foreign accent: uncommon number errors showed P600; common gender errors showed N400 effect, indicating no late repair processes.

Conclusions:

  • Neural processing of speech is affected by speaker's accent.
  • Error typicality significantly impacts the neural time course of language parsing.
  • Listeners' brains show different responses to common versus uncommon errors in foreign-accented speech.