Skip to main content

Random and Systematic Errors in Context

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Counteracting Methodological Errors in Behavioral Research
  • 521 Accesses

Abstract

The main objective of scientific research is to solve problems. Empirical studies are affected by random and systematic errors . Random errors decrease the precision of study results, but do not bias these results. In contrast, systematic errors bias study results. Errors and methods to prevent and correct errors are introduced, and are put into the context of the different parts of empirical studies (i.e., research questions, literature review, sampling, operationalizations, design, implementation, data analysis, and reporting).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adèr, H. J. (2008). Phases and initial steps in data analysis. In H. J. Adèr & G. J. Mellenbergh (with contributions by D. J. Hand), Advising on research methods: A consultant’s companion (pp. 333–356). Huizen, The Netherlands: van Kessel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, G. (2012). Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. London, England: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Groot, A. D. (1969). Methodology: Foundations of inference and research in the behavioral sciences. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlow, L. L. (2017). The making of Psychological Methods. Psychological Methods, 22, 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matzke, D., Nieuwenhuis, S., van Rijn, H., Slagter, H. A., van der Molen, M. W., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2015). The effect of horizontal eye movements on free recall: A preregistered adversarial collaboration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, e1–e15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellenbergh, G, J. (2008). General issues of research design. In H. J. Adèr & G. J. Mellenbergh (with contributions by D. J. Hand), Advising on research methods: A consultant’s companion (pp. 107–128). Huizen, The Netherlands: van Kessel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munafò, M. R., Nosek, B. A., Bishop, D. V. M., Button, K. S., Chambers, C. D., du Sert, N. P., et al. (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behavior, 1, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gideon J. Mellenbergh .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mellenbergh, G.J. (2019). Random and Systematic Errors in Context. In: Counteracting Methodological Errors in Behavioral Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12272-0_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics