The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Distribution‐Free and Robust Statistical Methods: Viable Alternatives to Parametric Statistics
Abstract
After making a case for the prevalence of nonnormality, this paper attempts to introduce some distribution—free and robust techniques to ecologists and to offer a critical appraisal of the potential advantages and drawbacks of these methods. The techniques presented fall into two distinct categories, methods based on ranks and "computer—intensive" techniques. Distribution—free rank tests have features that can be recommended. They free the practitioner from concern about the underlying distribution and are very robust to outliers. If the distribution underlying the observations is other than normal, rank tests tend to be more efficient than their parametric counterparts. The absence, in computing packages, or rank procedures for complex designs may, however, severely limit their use for ecological data. An entire body of novel distribution—free methods has been developed in parallel with the increasing capacities of today's computers to process large quantities of data. These techniques either reshuffle or resample a data set (i.e., sample with replacement) in order to perform their analyses. The former we shall refer to as "permutation" or "randomization" methods and the latter as "bootstrap" techniques. These computer—intensive methods provide new alternatives for the problem of a small and/or unbalanced data set, and they may be the solution for parameter estimation when the sampling distribution cannot be derived analytically. Caution must be exercised in the interpretation of these estimates because confidence limits may be too small.
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
Robust estimation of a location parameter
Huber, P. J. (1964) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177703732 · Cited by 7,228
Edgington, E., Edgington, E., & Onghena, P. (2007) · doi:10.1201/9781420011814 · Cited by 2,030
Statistical data analysis in the computer age
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. (1991) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.253.5018.390 · Cited by 1,192
Cited by
Measuring and testing dependence by correlation of distances
Székely, G. J., Rizzo, M. L., & Bakirov, N. K. (2007) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/009053607000000505 · Cited by 2,684
Vyas, A., Mitra, R., Shankaranarayana Rao, B. S., & Chattarji, S. (2002) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.22-15-06810.2002 · Cited by 1,662
ANOVA for unbalanced data: Use Type II instead of Type III sums of squares
Langsrud, Ø. (2003) · Statistics and Computing · doi:10.1023/a:1023260610025 · Cited by 469
NITROGEN LOADING FROM COASTAL WATERSHEDS TO RECEIVING ESTUARIES: NEW METHOD AND APPLICATION
Valiela, I., Collins, G., Kremer, J., Lajtha, K., Geist, M., Seely, B., Brawley, J., & Sham, C. H. (1997) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(1997)007[0358:nlfcwt]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 417
Effects of chronic stress on dendritic arborization in the central and extended amygdala
Vyas, A., Bernal, S., & Chattarji, S. (2003) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/s0006-8993(02)04162-8 · Cited by 291
Metadata
- Authors
- Potvin, C., & Roff, D. A.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1993-09
- Volume
- 74
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1617-1628
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2079477813
- Cited by
- 464
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 26.86
- 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: Distribution‐Free and Robust Statistical Methods: Viable Alternatives to Parametric Statistics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1939920
- The paper
- Potvin, C., & Roff, D. A. (1993). Distribution‐Free and Robust Statistical Methods: Viable Alternatives to Parametric Statistics. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1939920
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.