Cause Of Error In Measurement
Contents |
assumes that any observation is composed of the true value plus some random error value. But is that reasonable? What if all error is not random? Isn't it possible error in measurement physics that some errors are systematic, that they hold across most or all
Error In Measurement Worksheet
of the members of a group? One way to deal with this notion is to revise the simple true score error analysis measurement model by dividing the error component into two subcomponents, random error and systematic error. here, we'll look at the differences between these two types of errors and try to diagnose their relative error measurement effects on our research. What is Random Error? Random error is caused by any factors that randomly affect measurement of the variable across the sample. For instance, each person's mood can inflate or deflate their performance on any occasion. In a particular testing, some children may be feeling in a good mood and others may be depressed. If mood affects their performance on the
Systematic Error Measurement
measure, it may artificially inflate the observed scores for some children and artificially deflate them for others. The important thing about random error is that it does not have any consistent effects across the entire sample. Instead, it pushes observed scores up or down randomly. This means that if we could see all of the random errors in a distribution they would have to sum to 0 -- there would be as many negative errors as positive ones. The important property of random error is that it adds variability to the data but does not affect average performance for the group. Because of this, random error is sometimes considered noise. What is Systematic Error? Systematic error is caused by any factors that systematically affect measurement of the variable across the sample. For instance, if there is loud traffic going by just outside of a classroom where students are taking a test, this noise is liable to affect all of the children's scores -- in this case, systematically lowering them. Unlike random error, systematic errors tend to be consistently either positive or negative -- because of this, systematic error is sometimes
in measurement to have a general knowledge of likely error sources, so that: errors can be controlled where possible or the effects of the error error in measurement definition can be considered. With this understanding, a uniform standard of precision can error in measurement calculator be applied in all of the steps involved in arriving at an estimate. Such a standard reduces the chance
Error In Measurement Using Ruler
of wasting resources by measuring some things with little error, and others with great error when the final result uses both measurements. Errors arise from many sources. It pays the natural http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/measerr.php resource manager or scientist to determine as early as possible what are likely to be the dominant sources of error in the measurement task and to devote sufficient time to devising ways of reducing these errors. This is best accomplished by a preliminary trial - in short, a rehearsal. As well as providing a provisional estimate of the size of the various errors, http://fennerschool-associated.anu.edu.au/mensuration/BrackandWood1998/ERROR.HTM the rehearsal enables one to check that the procedures are appropriate and sound. There are four kinds of error: mistake accidental error bias sampling error Mistake Mistakes are caused by human carelessness, casualness or fallibility, e.g. incorrect use or reading of an instrument, error in recording, arithmetic error in calculations. There is no excuse for mistakes, but we all make them! In general, never be satisfied with a single reading no matter what you are measuring. Repeat the measurement. This shows up careless mistakes and improves the precision of the final result. Accidental error Accidental errors are unavoidable. They arise due to inconstant environmental conditions, limitations or deficiencies of instruments, assumptions and methods. Accidental error is usually not important as the error tends to be compensating. Accidental error can be reduced by using more accurate and precise equipment but this can be expensive. A competent scientist is expected to be able to assess in advance how good an instrument needs to be in order to give results of an accuracy sufficient for the task in hand. In other words, he / she is expected to ma
The difference between two measurements is called a variation in the measurements. Another word for this variation - http://www.regentsprep.org/regents/math/algebra/am3/LError.htm or uncertainty in measurement - is "error." This "error" is not http://www.physics.umd.edu/courses/Phys276/Hill/Information/Notes/ErrorAnalysis.html the same as a "mistake." It does not mean that you got the wrong answer. The error in measurement is a mathematical way to show the uncertainty in the measurement. It is the difference between the result of the measurement and the true value of what you error in were measuring. The precision of a measuring instrument is determined by the smallest unit to which it can measure. The precision is said to be the same as the smallest fractional or decimal division on the scale of the measuring instrument. Ways of Expressing Error in Measurement: 1. Greatest Possible Error: Because no measurement is exact, measurements error in measurement are always made to the "nearest something", whether it is stated or not. The greatest possible error when measuring is considered to be one half of that measuring unit. For example, you measure a length to be 3.4 cm. Since the measurement was made to the nearest tenth, the greatest possible error will be half of one tenth, or 0.05. 2. Tolerance intervals: Error in measurement may be represented by a tolerance interval (margin of error). Machines used in manufacturing often set tolerance intervals, or ranges in which product measurements will be tolerated or accepted before they are considered flawed. To determine the tolerance interval in a measurement, add and subtract one-half of the precision of the measuring instrument to the measurement. For example, if a measurement made with a metric ruler is 5.6 cm and the ruler has a precision of 0.1 cm, then the tolerance interval in this measurement is 5.6 0.05 cm, or from 5.55 cm to 5.65 cm. Any measurements within this range are "tolerated
of causes of random errors are: electronic noise in the circuit of an electrical instrument, irregular changes in the heat loss rate from a solar collector due to changes in the wind. Random errors often have a Gaussian normal distribution (see Fig. 2). In such cases statistical methods may be used to analyze the data. The mean m of a number of measurements of the same quantity is the best estimate of that quantity, and the standard deviation s of the measurements shows the accuracy of the estimate. The standard error of the estimate m is s/sqrt(n), where n is the number of measurements. Fig. 2. The Gaussian normal distribution. m = mean of measurements. s = standard deviation of measurements. 68% of the measurements lie in the interval m - s < x < m + s; 95% lie within m - 2s < x < m + 2s; and 99.7% lie within m - 3s < x < m + 3s. The precision of a measurement is how close a number of measurements of the same quantity agree with each other. The precision is limited by the random errors. It may usually be determined by repeating the measurements. Systematic Errors Systematic errors in experimental observations usually come from the measuring instruments. They may occur because: there is something wrong with the instrument or its data handling system, or because the instrument is wrongly used by the experimenter. Two types of systematic error can occur with instruments having a linear response: Offset or zero setting error in which the instrument does not read zero when the quantity to be measured is zero. Multiplier or scale factor error in which the instrument consistently reads changes in the quantity to be measured greater or less than the actual changes. These errors are shown in Fig. 1. Systematic errors also occur with non-linear instruments when the calibration of the instrument is not known correctly. Fig. 1. Systematic errors in a linear instrument (full line). Broken line shows response of an ideal instrument without error. Examples of systematic errors caused by the wrong use of instruments are: errors in measurements of temperature due to poor thermal contact between the therm