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

Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective01:23

Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective

189
In a study where individuals posing as strangers offered compliments and proposed casual sex to students, the responses differed significantly based on gender. Not a single woman accepted the proposal, while 70% of the men agreed. This outcome provides a useful scenario to explore through the lens of evolutionary psychology and social learning theory, highlighting the diverse perspectives on human sexual behaviors.
Evolutionary psychology provides one explanation for these findings, suggesting...
189
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
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

5.7K
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...
5.7K
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

6.3K
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...
6.3K
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error01:10

Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error

1.1K
The atomic mass of an element varies due to the relative ratio of its isotopes. A sample's relative proportion of oxygen isotopes influences its average atomic mass. For instance, if we were to measure the atomic mass of oxygen from a sample, the mass would be a weighted average of the isotopic masses of oxygen in that sample. Since a single sample is not likely to perfectly reflect the true atomic mass of oxygen for all the molecules of oxygen on Earth, the mass we obtain from this...
1.1K
Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

13.4K
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...
13.4K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Quantifying Upper Limb Movement During Naturalistic Driving: A Clinically Informed Ecological Approach.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

Effects of Smartphone Use on Sleep and Mental Health in Young Adults: Going Beyond Self-Report.

Depression and anxiety·2025
Same author

Do patient safety incident investigations align with systems thinking? An analysis of contributing factors and recommendations.

BMJ quality & safety·2025
Same author

The Factors That Contribute to Dysfunctional Behavior in Active Military Personnel: An Umbrella Review.

Trauma, violence & abuse·2025
Same author

Putting EHF into practice: five (more) challenges.

Ergonomics·2025
Same author

Evaluating the use of systems thinking methods in healthcare: a RE-AIM analysis of AcciMap and Net-HARMS.

Ergonomics·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 29, 2025

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

8.9K

State of science: evolving perspectives on 'human error'.

Gemma J M Read1, Steven Shorrock1,2, Guy H Walker1,3

  • 1Centre for Human Factors and Sociotechnical Systems, University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore, Australia.

Ergonomics
|July 10, 2021
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This review examines human error theories in Ergonomics and Human Factors (EHF), finding that focusing solely on individual mistakes limits understanding. A systems-level approach is crucial for optimizing safety and performance.

Keywords:
Human erroraccident analysiscomplex systemsfuture of ergonomicssystems thinking

More Related Videos

Perspectives on Neuroscience
26:41

Perspectives on Neuroscience

Published on: July 31, 2007

5.1K
Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
10:26

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities

Published on: September 11, 2021

4.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 29, 2025

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

8.9K
Perspectives on Neuroscience
26:41

Perspectives on Neuroscience

Published on: July 31, 2007

5.1K
Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
10:26

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities

Published on: September 11, 2021

4.1K

Area of Science:

  • Ergonomics and Human Factors (EHF)
  • Cognitive Psychology
  • System Safety

Background:

  • Human error theories have evolved over 60 years within EHF.
  • Existing approaches aim to understand, predict, and mitigate human error for safer systems.
  • The efficacy of the traditional 'human error approach' is increasingly debated.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review key perspectives on human error in EHF.
  • To analyze core theories and methods applied to human error over the last six decades.
  • To propose a way forward for the EHF community regarding human error.

Main Methods:

  • State-of-science literature review.
  • Analysis of conceptual difficulties in human error constructs.
  • Discussion of historical and current EHF theories and methods.

Main Results:

  • The construct of human error faces significant conceptual challenges in systems-focused EHF.
  • Traditional approaches have provided valuable insights but are insufficient on their own.
  • A shift from individual error to systems failure is necessary for holistic optimization.

Conclusions:

  • The 'human error approach' has limitations when applied to complex systems.
  • Understanding accidents and optimizing performance requires a broader systems perspective.
  • Future EHF research should prioritize systems-level analysis over individual error attribution.