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

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

9.3K
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...
9.3K
Errors in Taping01:18

Errors in Taping

274
Errors in taping arise from multiple factors that can significantly impact measurement accuracy in surveying. Misalignment of the tape, often due to human error, is one primary source. A skilled rear tapeman, using a telescope, can help correct alignment by guiding the head tapeman; however, human limitations still lead to small inaccuracies. These errors may include misplacement of pins or inaccurate tape readings due to common visual confusions, such as mistaking a six for a nine. Such...
274
Errors In Hypothesis Tests01:14

Errors In Hypothesis Tests

5.7K
When performing a hypothesis test, there are four possible outcomes depending on the actual truth (or falseness) of the null hypothesis and the decision to reject or not.
5.7K
Errors and Mistakes in Surveying01:19

Errors and Mistakes in Surveying

550
Errors and mistakes in surveying refer to inaccuracies in measurements and data recording. The errors are deviations from the actual value caused by human sensory limitations, equipment flaws, or environmental effects. These errors are typically unintentional and can result from the inherent imperfections in the instruments used, atmospheric conditions, or the observer’s inability to perceive exact measurements. On the other hand, mistakes are caused by the surveyor's lack of...
550
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

14.2K
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...
14.2K
Improving Translational Accuracy02:07

Improving Translational Accuracy

14.0K
Base complementarity between the three base pairs of mRNA codon and the tRNA anticodon is not a failsafe mechanism. Inaccuracies can range from a single mismatch to no correct base pairing at all. The free energy difference between the correct and nearly correct base pairs can be as small as 3 kcal/ mol. With complementarity being the only proofreading step, the estimated error frequency would be one wrong amino acid in every 100 amino acids incorporated. However, error frequencies observed in...
14.0K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

A German translation and adaptation of the knowledge hiding scale.

Frontiers in psychology·2026
Same author

No motor learning during action-imagery practice and no intermanual transfer in the two-ball-rotation task.

Journal of sports sciences·2026
Same author

Age(ncy) differences: Age-related changes in the use of sense of agency cues.

Consciousness and cognition·2026
Same author

The contribution of motor identity prediction to temporal binding.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2025
Same author

The role of inhibition in the processing of peripheral cues.

Psychological research·2025
Same author

Improvement by imagining actions: Bimanual transfer effects after action imagery practice in a sequential reaction time task.

Acta psychologica·2024
Same journal

Subtitle Engagement Varies with Audio-Subtitle Language-Script Pairing: Evidence from Hindi-English Bilinguals with an English-Medium Instruction Background.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Ultra-Early OCT Changes After Intravitreal Injection: Evidence Consistent with Transient Mechanical Compression.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

A Cerebral Basis for Visual Discomfort and Visual Stress.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Practice Effects and the Lanthony D15.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Wouldn't It Be Nice to Not Fall for It Twice? Prior Experience Does Not Abolish the Impact of Expectancy Violations on Attention Capture.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Treatment for Convergence Insufficiency with a New Digital Mobile Platform: A Comparative Preliminary Study.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 3, 2026

An Assessment Method and Toolkit to Evaluate Keyboard Design on Smartphones
05:42

An Assessment Method and Toolkit to Evaluate Keyboard Design on Smartphones

Published on: October 5, 2020

3.6K

Errors in Imagined and Executed Typing.

Stephan F Dahm1, Martina Rieger1

  • 1Department of Psychology and Medical Sciences; Institute of Psychology, UMIT-Private University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, 6060 Hall in Tyrol, Austria.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)
|November 24, 2019
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Error detection during motor imagery (MI) and motor execution (ME) differs. Fewer motor command errors are detected in MI, suggesting attention is diverted from lower-level processes.

Keywords:
feedbackforward modelsinternal monitoringmotor imagerytyping style

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Neurorehabilitation Through EEG, Motor Imagery, and Virtual Reality
10:14

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Neurorehabilitation Through EEG, Motor Imagery, and Virtual Reality

Published on: May 10, 2024

1.7K
P300-Based Brain-Computer Interface Speller Performance Estimation with Classifier-Based Latency Estimation
06:09

P300-Based Brain-Computer Interface Speller Performance Estimation with Classifier-Based Latency Estimation

Published on: September 8, 2023

869

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 3, 2026

An Assessment Method and Toolkit to Evaluate Keyboard Design on Smartphones
05:42

An Assessment Method and Toolkit to Evaluate Keyboard Design on Smartphones

Published on: October 5, 2020

3.6K
Author Spotlight: Enhancing Neurorehabilitation Through EEG, Motor Imagery, and Virtual Reality
10:14

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Neurorehabilitation Through EEG, Motor Imagery, and Virtual Reality

Published on: May 10, 2024

1.7K
P300-Based Brain-Computer Interface Speller Performance Estimation with Classifier-Based Latency Estimation
06:09

P300-Based Brain-Computer Interface Speller Performance Estimation with Classifier-Based Latency Estimation

Published on: September 8, 2023

869

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Motor Control
  • Human-Computer Interaction

Background:

  • Internal models in motor imagery (MI) predict action effects.
  • Mismatches between predicted and intended effects trigger error detection.
  • Comparing error detection in MI and motor execution (ME) is crucial for understanding cognitive processes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare error detection mechanisms between motor imagery and motor execution.
  • To investigate the influence of typing skill and visual feedback on error detection.
  • To identify differences in error reporting based on typing proficiency and visual conditions.

Main Methods:

  • Ten-finger and hunt-and-peck typists performed a copy-typing task under varying screen and keyboard visibility conditions.
  • Participants reported error types and detection sources.
  • Error detection in motor imagery (MI) and motor execution (ME) was analyzed.

Main Results:

  • Reduced screen visibility led to fewer reported errors, highlighting the role of distal effects.
  • Higher-order planning errors did not differ between MI and ME with a covered screen.
  • Motor command errors were less frequently reported in MI compared to ME.
  • Ten-finger typists detected more planning errors via kinesthesis/touch and fewer motor command errors via keyboard vision than hunt-and-peck typists.

Conclusions:

  • Error detection mechanisms share similarities between MI and ME, particularly in utilizing sensory feedback sources.
  • Only pre-modeling errors are equally detected in MI and ME.
  • MI may demand more attentional resources, potentially impairing the detection of motor command errors.
  • Typing expertise influences error detection strategies, with skilled typists relying more on proprioceptive feedback.