The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Processing Data for Outliers
Abstract
Every experimenter has at some time or other faced the problem of whether certain of his observations properly belong in his presentation of measurements obtained. He must decide whether these observations are valid. If they are not valid the experimenter will wish to discard them or at least treat his data in a manner which will minimize their effect on his conclusions. Frequently interest in this topic arises only in the final stages of data processing. It is the author's view that a consideration of this sort is more properly made at the recording stage or perhaps at the stage of preliminary processing. I This problem will be discussed in terms of the following general models. We assume that observations are independently drawn from a particular distribution or alternatively, we assume that an observation is occasionally obtained from some other population and that there is nothing in the experimental situation to indicate that this has happened except what may be inferred from the observational reading itself.2 We assume that if no extraneous observations occur, the observations (or some transformation of them, such as logs) follow a normal distribution. We shall also assume that the occasional extraneous observations are either from a population with a shifted mean or from a population with the same mean and a larger variance. These assumptions may not be completely realistic but procedures developed for these alternatives should be helpful. If one is taking observations where either of these models apply there remain two distinct problems. First, one may attempt to pick out the particular observation or observations which are from the different populations. One may be interested in this selection either to decide that something has gone wrong with the experimental procedure resulting in this observation (in which case he will not wish to include the result) or that this observation gives an indication of some unusual occurrence which the investigator may wish to explore further.
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
Dixon, W. J. (1950) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177729747 · Cited by 652
Self-citationRatios Involving Extreme Values
Dixon, W. J. (1951) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177729693 · Cited by 303
Self-citation
Cited by
Procedures for Detecting Outlying Observations in Samples
Grubbs, F. E. (1969) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1969.10490657 · Cited by 4,105
Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk
Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0124-6 · Cited by 3,172
Statistical Methods for Environmental Pollution Monitoring.
Lambert, D., & Gilbert, R. O. (1988) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290180 · Cited by 2,066
Friedrichs, K. R., Harr, K. E., Freeman, K. P., Szladovits, B., Walton, R. M., Barnhart, K. F., & Blanco‐Chavez, J. (2012) · Veterinary Clinical Pathology · doi:10.1111/vcp.12006 · Cited by 1,293
Generation and Application of Data on Biological Variation in Clinical Chemistry
Fraser, G. G., & Harris, E. K. (1989) · Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences · doi:10.3109/10408368909106595 · Cited by 870
Metadata
- Authors
- Dixon, W. J.
- Venue
- Biometrics
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1953-03
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 74
- ISSN
- 0006-341X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2328056838
- Cited by
- 868
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 0.78
- 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: Processing Data for Outliers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/3001634
- The paper
- Dixon, W. J. (1953). Processing Data for Outliers. Biometrics. https://doi.org/10.2307/3001634
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.