[Phys-L] Re: Human Error?

[John Denker <jsd@AV8N.COM>]

Edmiston, Mike wrote:

> ... the rationale I give for never listing human error is
> that by the time you publish your results (i.e. hand in
> the report) you should have eliminated any human error.
> If you feel the "straight-line graph" should be
> straighter, or the points should have less scatter, and
> you truly suspect you might have goofed... then go do it
> again.  Keep doing it again and refining your technique
> until you are convinced human error is no longer a likely
> candidate for the problems you see.  If you still feel
> compelled to list human error, that is, if you still
> believe human error is a likely cause of your poor
> results, you are not ready to publish.

> I should also point out that I work in an environment in
> which sending a student back to the lab is a possibility,
> and it has become routine.  I realize some teaching
> environments do not allow this.

That is entirely reasonable.  That reflects "real-world
thinking" ... which classrooms should but often don't.

> Anyway... my question to this group is... How did reporting "human
> error" as a source of error become so prevalent?

It comes from students' previous experience in classes where
they were _not_ allowed to redo the work, and were required
to hand it in at a predetermined time, ready or not ... in
which case human error might be the most honest explanation
for the data.

What's appropriate under one set of constraints may
not be appropriate under another.
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l