A more thorough explanation:

Definition: Cumulative-error analysis is a process used by appellate courts to determine whether the combination of several small errors made during a trial had a significant impact on the outcome. If the errors, when taken together, had a prejudicial effect on the outcome, they may be considered reversible errors.

Example: During a criminal trial, the judge allowed the prosecutor to introduce evidence that should have been excluded. The defense attorney objected, but the judge overruled the objection. Later, the judge made a mistake in instructing the jury on the law. These errors, on their own, may not have been enough to change the outcome of the trial. However, when combined, they may have had a significant impact on the jury's decision. In this case, the appellate court may conduct a cumulative-error analysis to determine whether the errors were harmless or prejudicial.

Explanation: The example illustrates how several small errors made during a trial can have a significant impact on the outcome. In this case, the appellate court may review the errors to determine whether they had a cumulative effect that prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial. If the court finds that the errors were prejudicial, it may reverse the trial court's decision and order a new trial.