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

Errors and Mistakes in Surveying01:19

Errors and Mistakes in Surveying

467
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...
467
Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors01:17

Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors

262
A survey team is tasked with determining the elevation difference between points Point A and Point B, separated by uneven terrain. They use a leveling instrument and a leveling rod.Common MistakesMisreading the Rod: During a backsight reading at Point A, the instrumentman observes the rod partially obscured by tall grass. Instead of reading 1.135 m, they mistakenly record 1.735 m due to the misalignment of the crosshair with the wrong graduation. This error adds 0.600 m to all subsequent...
262
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

98.8K
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. 
98.8K
Errors in Taping01:18

Errors in Taping

224
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...
224
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

14.1K
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...
14.1K
Self-Discrepancy Theory02:45

Self-Discrepancy Theory

18.7K
One influential perspective on what motivates people's behavior is detailed in Tory Higgin's self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987). He proposed that people hold disagreeing internal representations of themselves that lead to different emotional states.  
18.7K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Preference Dynamics in Sequential Consumer Choice with Defaults.

JMR, Journal of marketing research·2026
Same author

Commentary: On the Equal-Opportunity Jerk "Defense": Rudeness Complicates Sexism Attributions but Comes at a Cost.

Psychological science·2026
Same author

A timeline of cognitive costs in decision-making.

Trends in cognitive sciences·2025
Same author

Using survival prediction techniques to learn consumer-specific reservation price distributions.

PloS one·2021
Same author

Enacting rituals to improve self-control.

Journal of personality and social psychology·2018
Same author

Motivation by anticipation: expecting rapid feedback enhances performance.

Psychological science·2010

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Dec 9, 2025

Movement Retraining using Real-time Feedback of Performance
08:16

Movement Retraining using Real-time Feedback of Performance

Published on: January 17, 2013

13.7K

Miscalibration in predicting one's performance: Disentangling misplacement and misestimation.

Isabelle Engeler1, Gerald Häubl2

  • 1Department of Marketing.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
|September 11, 2020
PubMed
Summary

People mispredicting their performance do so in two ways: misplacement and misestimation. This study reveals erroneous better-than-average beliefs stem from underestimating own performance, while worse-than-average beliefs stem from underestimating others' performance.

More Related Videos

Visualization Method for Proprioceptive Drift on a 2D Plane Using Support Vector Machine
07:05

Visualization Method for Proprioceptive Drift on a 2D Plane Using Support Vector Machine

Published on: October 27, 2016

9.5K
Measurement of Spatial Stability in Precision Grip
09:36

Measurement of Spatial Stability in Precision Grip

Published on: June 4, 2020

3.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Dec 9, 2025

Movement Retraining using Real-time Feedback of Performance
08:16

Movement Retraining using Real-time Feedback of Performance

Published on: January 17, 2013

13.7K
Visualization Method for Proprioceptive Drift on a 2D Plane Using Support Vector Machine
07:05

Visualization Method for Proprioceptive Drift on a 2D Plane Using Support Vector Machine

Published on: October 27, 2016

9.5K
Measurement of Spatial Stability in Precision Grip
09:36

Measurement of Spatial Stability in Precision Grip

Published on: June 4, 2020

3.4K

Area of Science:

  • Psychology
  • Cognitive Science
  • Behavioral Economics

Background:

  • Performance predictions involve misplacement (relative to others) and misestimation (absolute terms).
  • Prior research presents conflicting findings on the directionality of these miscalibration types.
  • Existing studies show disagreement on whether better-than-average (BTA) individuals underestimate or overestimate absolute performance.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To reconcile contradictory findings on performance miscalibration.
  • To investigate the asymmetric sources of erroneous better-than-average (BTA) and worse-than-average (WTA) placement beliefs.
  • To unify seemingly conflicting conclusions in prior research on self-performance prediction.

Main Methods:

  • Two field studies were conducted to examine performance miscalibration.
  • Distinguished between correct and erroneous placement beliefs, focusing on erroneous ones.
  • Reanalyzed data from Moore and Small (2007) to support findings.

Main Results:

  • Erroneous BTA beliefs are primarily driven by misestimation of one's own absolute performance.
  • Erroneous WTA beliefs tend to be driven by misestimation of others' absolute performance.
  • Asymmetry identified in the sources of misplacement beliefs.

Conclusions:

  • Conflicting prior results may stem from varying proportions of erroneous vs. correct placement beliefs in study samples.
  • Provides novel insights into the psychology of performance prediction errors.
  • Offers a unified framework for understanding performance miscalibration.