The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparing measures of sample skewness and kurtosis
Abstract
Over the years, various measures of sample skewness and kurtosis have been proposed. Comparisons are made between those measures adopted by well-known statistical computing packages, focusing on bias and mean-squared error for normal samples, and presenting some comparisons from simulation results for non-normal samples
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Isolation-Based Anomaly Detection
Liu, F. T., Ting, K. M., & Zhou, Z.-H. (2012) · ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data · doi:10.1145/2133360.2133363 · Cited by 2,063
Global mountain topography and the fate of montane species under climate change
Elsen, P. R., & Tingley, M. W. (2015) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate2656 · Cited by 516
dos Santos, P. M., & Cirillo, M. Â. (2023) · Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation · doi:10.1080/03610918.2021.1888122 · Cited by 289
Adult-onset autoimmune diabetes: current knowledge and implications for management
Buzzetti, R., Zampetti, S., & Maddaloni, E. (2017) · Nature Reviews Endocrinology · doi:10.1038/nrendo.2017.99 · Cited by 271
Problematic standard errors and confidence intervals for skewness and kurtosis
Wright, D. B., & Herrington, J. A. (2011) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-010-0044-x · Cited by 109
Metadata
- Authors
- Joanes, D. N., & Gill, C. A.
- Venue
- Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician)
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-03
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 183-189
- ISSN
- 0039-0526 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9884
- OpenAlex
- W2075851722
- Cited by
- 997
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Comparing measures of sample skewness and kurtosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1467-9884.00122
- The paper
- Joanes, D. N., & Gill, C. A. (1998). Comparing measures of sample skewness and kurtosis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician). https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9884.00122
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.
