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

Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

10.9K
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...
10.9K
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

73.6K
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. 
73.6K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

1.4K
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...
1.4K
Random Error01:04

Random Error

858
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...
858
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

1.5K
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...
1.5K
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

186
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
186

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Cerebellar perturbation impairs human working memory and degrades spatial tuning throughout cortex.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
Same author

PupEyes: An interactive Python library for eye movement data processing.

Behavior research methods·2026
Same author

Striatal Dopamine Actions and Movement: Inferences from Parkinson Disease.

The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience·2025
Same author

Are abrupt onsets highly salient?

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

Dissociable Causal Roles of Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex and Primary Motor Cortex over the Course of Motor Skill Development.

The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience·2025
Same author

Publisher Correction: Errors of attention adaptively warp spatial cognition.

Nature human behaviour·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 18, 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

8.6K

People are more error-prone after committing an error.

Tyler J Adkins1, Han Zhang1, Taraz G Lee2

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Nature Communications
|July 30, 2024
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Post-error slowing isn't just caution; errors impair cognitive processing, leading to more mistakes. This suggests slowing is an adaptive response to reduced processing efficacy, not a speed-accuracy trade-off.

More Related Videos

Operant Procedures for Assessing Behavioral Flexibility in Rats
08:30

Operant Procedures for Assessing Behavioral Flexibility in Rats

Published on: February 15, 2015

20.8K
New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat
09:45

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat

Published on: January 23, 2017

8.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 18, 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

8.6K
Operant Procedures for Assessing Behavioral Flexibility in Rats
08:30

Operant Procedures for Assessing Behavioral Flexibility in Rats

Published on: February 15, 2015

20.8K
New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat
09:45

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat

Published on: January 23, 2017

8.2K

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience
  • Human Performance

Background:

  • Post-error slowing is a common phenomenon in human performance.
  • Traditional explanations attribute this slowing to increased caution.
  • However, accuracy often doesn't improve after errors, questioning the caution hypothesis.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the underlying mechanisms of post-error slowing.
  • To differentiate between strategic adjustments (caution) and processing impairments after errors.
  • To characterize the temporal dynamics of cognitive processing following errors.

Main Methods:

  • Utilized tasks with controlled response timing to isolate processing stages.
  • Analyzed response accuracy and latency.
  • Employed a computational model of response preparation.

Main Results:

  • Participants remained less accurate after errors, even with sufficient time.
  • A computational model ruled out general slowing of cognitive processing.
  • Errors were found to impair the efficacy of cognitive processing in generating responses.
  • Increased action slips, often repetitions of the prior error, were observed post-error.

Conclusions:

  • Post-error slowing may not solely reflect a strategic shift in speed-accuracy trade-offs.
  • Impaired cognitive processing efficacy, rather than increased caution, appears to underlie post-error performance decrements.
  • This impairment leads to an altered speed-accuracy relationship, potentially as an adaptive mechanism.