Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 868

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

Dixon, W. J.·1953·Biometrics

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3001634

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 868

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.