The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pairwise multiple comparisons of treatment means in agronomic research
Abstract
Pairwise multiple comparisons of treatment means are appropriate in the statistical analysis of some agronomic experiments. This paper includes a review and definitions of the types and frequency rates of statistical errors with regard to pairwise multiple comparisons. Of the 10 pairwise multiple comparisons procedures described herein, the least significant difference is the procedure of choice when the appropriate contrasts among treatments each involve only two of the treatment means. This choice is based on considerations of error rates, power, and correct decision rates as well as simplicity of computation.
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
Cites
An Approximate Distribution of Estimates of Variance Components
Satterthwaite, F. E. (1946) · Biometrics Bulletin · doi:10.2307/3002019 · Cited by 4,373
Cited by
Multiple Comparison Procedures: The Practical Solution
Saville, D. J. (1990) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1080/00031305.1990.10475712 · Cited by 696
Metadata
- Authors
- Carmer, S. G., & Walker, W. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Agronomic Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1985-03
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 19-26
- ISSN
- 0094-2391 (ISSN-L)
- 2689-7113
- OpenAlex
- W3029855249
- Cited by
- 188
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.26
- 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: Pairwise multiple comparisons of treatment means in agronomic research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2134/jae1985.0019
- The paper
- Carmer, S. G., & Walker, W. M. (1985). Pairwise multiple comparisons of treatment means in agronomic research. Journal of Agronomic Education. https://doi.org/10.2134/jae1985.0019
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.
