Possible Sources Of Error In Measurement
Contents |
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 can be considered. With this understanding, a uniform standard of precision can types of sources of error be applied in all of the steps involved in arriving at an estimate. Such a
Common Sources Of Error In Chemistry Labs
standard reduces the chance of wasting resources by measuring some things with little error, and others with great error when the final result
Different Types Of Errors In Measurement
uses both measurements. Errors arise from many sources. It pays the natural 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
Sources Of Error In Measurement In Research Methodology
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, 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 sources of error in measurement ppt 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 make an appropriate choice from the equipment available (or to design a more appropriate instrument). Bias Bias is a systematic distortion in a measurement, i.e. it is a non-compensating error. Common sources of bias are: flaw in measurement instrument or tool, e.g. survey tape 50 cm short; flaw in the method of selecting a sample, e.g. stocking counts - some observers always count the boundary tree, others always exclude it; flaw in the technique of est
quantity that arises as a result of the process of measurement or approximation. Another term for error is uncertainty. Physical quantities such as weight, volume, sources of error in physics temperature, speed, or time must all be measured by an instrument of sources of error in experiments one sort or another. No matter how accurate the measuring tool—be it an atomic clock that determines time sources of errors in english language based on atomic oscillation or a laser interferometer that measures distance to a fraction of a wavelength of light some finite amount of uncertainty is involved in the measurement. http://fennerschool-associated.anu.edu.au/mensuration/BrackandWood1998/ERROR.HTM Thus, a measured quantity is only as accurate as the error involved in the measuring process. In other words, the error, or uncertainty, of a measurement is as important as the measurement itself. As an example, imagine trying to measure the volume of water in a bathtub. Using a gallon bucket as a measuring tool, it would only be possible http://science.jrank.org/pages/2570/Error.html to measure the volume accurately to the nearest full bucket, or gallon. Any fractional gallon of water remaining would be added as an estimated volume. Thus, the value given for the volume would have a potential error or uncertainty of something less than a bucket. Now suppose the bucket were scribed with lines dividing it into quarters. Given the resolving power of the human eye, it is possible to make a good guess of the measurement to the nearest quarter gallon, but the guess could be affected by factors such as viewing angle, accuracy of the scribing, tilts in the surface holding the bucket, etc. Thus, a measurement that appeared to be 6.5 gal (24.6 l) could be in error by as much as one quarter of a gallon, and might actually be closer to 6.25 gal (23.6 l) or 6.75 gal (25.5 l). To express this uncertainty in the measurement process, one would write the volume as 6.5 gallons +/-0.25 gallons. As the resolution of the measurement increases, the accuracy increases and the error decrease
assumes that any observation is composed of the true value plus some random error value. But is that reasonable? What if all error http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/measerr.php is not random? Isn't it possible that some errors are systematic, that they hold across most or all of the members of a group? One way to deal with this notion is to revise the simple true score model by dividing the error component into two subcomponents, random error and systematic error. here, we'll look at the of error differences between these two types of errors and try to diagnose their 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 sources of error be feeling in a good mood and others may be depressed. If mood affects their performance on the 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 nois