Talk:Paired data

Paired values are NOT necessarily "on the same individual at different points in time"

This is a common error. Please be aware that when using references not written by statisticians, errors like this are likely to be present.

Values measured at the same time on *different* individuals may be paired, for example. Consider measuring the same variable on twins, for example (blood pressure, perhaps).

Glenbarnett (talk) 06:25, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

More than a year later, it's *still* wrong. Why are *doctors* regarded as providing a worthwhile reference on this? Will we also cite accountants for articles on medicine and plumbing magazines for articles on physics? Is there no standard at all?

Glenbarnett (talk) 05:04, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a stub badly in need of citations, but I hope that the text is slightly better now.

I'm here because this issue was raised at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. We should discuss here, not there.

I am not a statistician, but it seems fine to have Paired sample redirect here. I do not think that heavy discussion of Sampling (statistics) is needed here. The phrases "dependent sample" and "independent sample" seem ripe for misinterpretation (i.e. IID), so I left them out. Mgnbar (talk) 19:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]