Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Robust Statistical Methods for Empirical Software Engineering

Open access
Kitchenham, Barbara, Madeyski, Lech, Budgen, David, Keung, Jacky, Brereton, Pearl, Charters, Stuart, Gibbs, Shirley, Pohthong, Amnart·2017·Empirical Software Engineering

Abstract

There have been many changes in statistical theory in the past 30 years, including increased evidence that non-robust methods may fail to detect important results. The statistical advice available to software engineering researchers needs to be updated to address these issues. This paper aims both to explain the new results in the area of robust analysis methods and to provide a large-scale worked example of the new methods. We summarise the results of analyses of the Type 1 error efficiency and power of standard parametric and non-parametric statistical tests when applied to non-normal data sets. We identify parametric and non-parametric methods that are robust to non-normality. We present an analysis of a large-scale software engineering experiment to illustrate their use. We illustrate the use of kernel density plots, and parametric and non-parametric methods using four different software engineering data sets. We explain why the methods are necessary and the rationale for selecting a specific analysis. We suggest using kernel density plots rather than box plots to visualise data distributions. For parametric analysis, we recommend trimmed means, which can support reliable tests of the differences between the central location of two or more samples. When the distribution of the data differs among groups, or we have ordinal scale data, we recommend non-parametric methods such as Cliff’s δ or a robust rank-based ANOVA-like method.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10664-016-9437-5

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Kitchenham, B., Madeyski, L., Budgen, D., Keung, J., Brereton, P., Charters, S., Gibbs, S., & Pohthong, A.
Venue
Empirical Software Engineering
Published
2016-06-16
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
579-630
ISSN
  • 1382-3256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7616
OpenAlex
W2424693453
Cited by
257
References
6
FWCI
68.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Robust Statistical Methods for Empirical Software Engineering. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10664-016-9437-5
The paper
Kitchenham, B., Madeyski, L., Budgen, D., Keung, J., Brereton, P., Charters, S., Gibbs, S., & Pohthong, A. (2017). Robust Statistical Methods for Empirical Software Engineering. Empirical Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-016-9437-5

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.