A comparison of multiple imputation strategies to deal with missing nonnormal data in structural equation modeling

被引:7
|
作者
Jia, Fan [1 ]
Wu, Wei [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Merced, Psychol Sci, 5200 N Lake Rd, Merced, CA 95343 USA
[2] Indiana Univ Purdue Univ, Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA
关键词
Missing data; Nonnormality; Multiple imputation; Full information maximum likelihood; Predictive mean matching; Classification and regression trees; Random forest; INFORMATION MAXIMUM-LIKELIHOOD; FULLY CONDITIONAL SPECIFICATION; COVARIANCE STRUCTURE-ANALYSIS; 2-STAGE APPROACH; STANDARD ERRORS; TEST STATISTICS; PERFORMANCE; ROBUSTNESS; SAMPLE; IMPUTE;
D O I
10.3758/s13428-022-01936-y
中图分类号
B841 [心理学研究方法];
学科分类号
040201 ;
摘要
Missing data and nonnormality are two common factors that can affect analysis results from structural equation modeling (SEM). The current study aims to address a challenging situation in which the two factors coexist (i.e., missing nonnormal data). Using Monte Carlo simulation, we evaluated the performance of four multiple imputation (MI) strategies with respect to parameter and standard error estimation. These strategies include MI with normality-based model (MI-NORM), predictive mean matching (MI-PMM), classification and regression trees (MI-CART), and random forest (MI-RF). We also compared these MI strategies with robust full information maximum likelihood (RFIML), a popular (non-imputation) method to deal with missing nonnormal data in SEM. The results suggest that MI-NORM had similar performance to RFIML. MI-PMM outperformed the other methods when data were not missing on the heavy tail of a skewed distribution. Although MI-CART and MI-RF do not require any distribution assumption, they did not perform well compared with the others. Based on the results, practical guidance is provided.
引用
收藏
页码:3100 / 3119
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Alternative Multiple Imputation Inference for Categorical Structural Equation Modeling
    Chung, Seungwon
    Cai, Li
    [J]. MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2018, 53 (01) : 148 - 148
  • [22] A Comparison of Imputation Strategies for Ordinal Missing Data on Likert Scale Variables
    Wu, Wei
    Jia, Fan
    Enders, Craig
    [J]. MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2015, 50 (05) : 484 - 503
  • [23] Multiple imputation with missing data indicators
    Beesley, Lauren J.
    Bondarenko, Irina
    Elliot, Michael R.
    Kurian, Allison W.
    Katz, Steven J.
    Taylor, Jeremy M. G.
    [J]. STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2021, 30 (12) : 2685 - 2700
  • [24] MULTIPLE IMPUTATION AS A MISSING DATA MACHINE
    BRAND, J
    VANBUUREN, S
    VANMULLIGEN, EM
    TIMMERS, T
    GELSEMA, E
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 1994, : 303 - 306
  • [25] Multiple Imputation For Missing Ordinal Data
    Chen, Ling
    Toma-Drane, Mariana
    Valois, Robert F.
    Drane, J. Wanzer
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MODERN APPLIED STATISTICAL METHODS, 2005, 4 (01) : 288 - 299
  • [26] Multiple imputation: dealing with missing data
    de Goeij, Moniek C. M.
    van Diepen, Merel
    Jager, Kitty J.
    Tripepi, Giovanni
    Zoccali, Carmine
    Dekker, Friedo W.
    [J]. NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION, 2013, 28 (10) : 2415 - 2420
  • [27] Multiple imputation for nonignorable missing data
    Im, Jongho
    Kim, Soeun
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN STATISTICAL SOCIETY, 2017, 46 (04) : 583 - 592
  • [28] Multiple imputation for nonignorable missing data
    Jongho Im
    Soeun Kim
    [J]. Journal of the Korean Statistical Society, 2017, 46 : 583 - 592
  • [29] Multiple Imputation of Missing Data at Level 2: A Comparison of Fully Conditional and Joint Modeling in Multilevel Designs
    Grund, Simon
    Luedtke, Oliver
    Robitzsch, Alexander
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICS, 2018, 43 (03) : 316 - 353
  • [30] A comparison of multiple imputation and doubly robust estimation for analyses with missing data
    Carpenter, James R.
    Kenward, Michael G.
    Vansteelandt, Stijn
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY, 2006, 169 : 571 - 584