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

Stereotype Content Model02:16

Stereotype Content Model

15.0K
The Stereotype Content Model (SCM) was first proposed by Susan Fiske and her colleagues (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick & Xu, 2002; see also Fiske, 2012 and Fiske, 2017). The SCM specifies that when someone encounters a new group, they will stereotype them based on two metrics: warmth—or that group’s perceived intent, and how likely they are to provide help or inflict harm—and competence—or their ability to carry out that objective. Depending on the warmth-competence...
15.0K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

6.0K
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...
6.0K
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

13.9K
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...
13.9K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Bridging cognition and control through passive eye movement integration in motor imagery brain-computer interfaces.

Frontiers in human neuroscience·2026
Same author

Expertise-dependent mental representation in chess: evaluation and comparisons based on structural dimensional analysis-motoric.

Frontiers in psychology·2026
Same author

Test-Retest Reliability, Parallel Test Reliability, and Internal Consistency of Balance Assessments in Young Healthy Adults.

Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology·2025
Same author

Neurophysiological predictors of deep learning based unilateral upper limb motor imagery classification.

Frontiers in human neuroscience·2025
Same author

Modelling the associations between students' academic resilience, learning motivation, self-regulated learning and academic well-being in Ghana.

Acta psychologica·2025
Same author

Cognitive, Neurophysiological, and Behavioral Adaptations in Golf Putting Motor Learning: A Holistic Approach.

Psychological research·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 6, 2025

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory
07:26

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

Published on: January 31, 2017

38.9K

Empirical relationships between algorithmic SDA-M-based memory assessments and human errors in manual assembly tasks.

Benjamin Strenge1, Thomas Schack2

  • 1Center for Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC), Neurocognition and Action Group, Bielefeld University, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany. benjamin.strenge@uni-bielefeld.de.

Scientific Reports
|May 5, 2021
PubMed
Summary

This study shows that algorithmic assessment of workers' mental structures can predict human errors in manufacturing tasks. This technology offers user-specific assistance for improved performance and safety in Industry 4.0 settings.

More Related Videos

Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories
08:53

Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories

Published on: November 14, 2018

9.9K
Automated, Long-term Behavioral Assay for Cognitive Functions in Multiple Genetic Models of Alzheimer's Disease, Using IntelliCage
06:46

Automated, Long-term Behavioral Assay for Cognitive Functions in Multiple Genetic Models of Alzheimer's Disease, Using IntelliCage

Published on: August 4, 2018

12.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 6, 2025

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory
07:26

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

Published on: January 31, 2017

38.9K
Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories
08:53

Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories

Published on: November 14, 2018

9.9K
Automated, Long-term Behavioral Assay for Cognitive Functions in Multiple Genetic Models of Alzheimer's Disease, Using IntelliCage
06:46

Automated, Long-term Behavioral Assay for Cognitive Functions in Multiple Genetic Models of Alzheimer's Disease, Using IntelliCage

Published on: August 4, 2018

12.4K

Area of Science:

  • Human-Computer Interaction
  • Manufacturing Engineering
  • Cognitive Science

Background:

  • Manufacturing relies heavily on human workers, even in Industry 4.0, for customized production.
  • Augmented reality and cognitive support systems can enhance manual assembly processes.
  • Algorithmic assessment of mental structures offers potential for error prediction and worker assistance.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To empirically investigate the relationship between algorithmic assessments of individual memory structures and human errors in assembly tasks.
  • To evaluate the practical applicability of automated SDA-M assessment approaches under realistic, theoretically violated conditions.

Main Methods:

  • Two studies were conducted using assembly tasks.
  • Algorithmic assessment of task-related mental representation structures based on SDA-M was employed.
  • Theoretical assumptions of SDA-M were deliberately violated in realistic scenarios to test robustness.

Main Results:

  • Substantial, though imperfect, correspondences were found between mental representation structures and actual task performance.
  • Sensitivity and specificity values for error prediction ranged from 0.63 to 0.72.
  • Prediction accuracies were significantly above chance level, indicating practical applicability.

Conclusions:

  • Automated assessment of cognitive structures shows promise for anticipating human errors in manufacturing.
  • This technology can enable user-specific assistance, improving worker support and performance in Industry 4.0.
  • Further research is needed to refine the accuracy and robustness of these predictive models.