Abstract
Conducting sample surveys, imputing incomplete observations, and analyzing the resulting data are three indispensable phases of modern practice with public-use data files and with many other statistical applications. Each phase inherits different input, including the information preceding it and the intellectual assessments available, and aims to provide output that is one step closer to arriving at statistical inferences with scientific relevance. However, the role of the imputation phase has often been viewed as merely providing computational convenience for users of data. Although facilitating computation is very important, such a viewpoint ignores the imputer's assessments and information inaccessible to the users. This view underlies the recent controversy over the validity of multiple-imputation inference when a procedure for analyzing multiply imputed data sets cannot be derived from (is "uncongenial" to) the model adopted for multiple imputation. Given sensible imputations and complete-data analysis procedures, inferences from standard multiple-imputation combining rules are typically superior to, and thus different from, users' incomplete-data analyses. The latter may suffer from serious nonresponse biases because such analyses often must rely on convenient but unrealistic assumptions about the nonresponse mechanism. When it is desirable to conduct inferences under models for nonresponse other than the original imputation model, a possible alternative to recreating imputations is to incorporate appropriate importance weights into the standard combining rules. These points are reviewed and explored by simple examples and general theory, from both Bayesian and frequentist perspectives, particularly from the randomization perspective. Some convenient terms are suggested for facilitating communication among researchers from different perspectives when evaluating multiple-imputation inferences with uncongenial sources of input.
Keywords
Related Publications
Miscellanea. Small-sample degrees of freedom with multiple imputation
An appealing feature of multiple imputation is the simplicity of the rules for combining the multiple complete-data inferences into a final inference, the repeated-imputation in...
Multiple imputation of discrete and continuous data by fully conditional specification
The goal of multiple imputation is to provide valid inferences for statistical estimates from incomplete data. To achieve that goal, imputed values should preserve the structure...
Multiple Imputation in Practice
Missing data frequently complicates data analysis for scientific investigations. The development of statistical methods to address missing data has been an active area of resear...
Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys
Tables and Figures. Glossary. 1. Introduction. 1.1 Overview. 1.2 Examples of Surveys with Nonresponse. 1.3 Properly Handling Nonresponse. 1.4 Single Imputation. 1.5 Multiple Imp...
Multiple Imputation and its Application
A practical guide to analysing partially observed data. Collecting, analysing and drawing inferences from data is central to research in the medical and social sciences. Unfortu...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1994
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 4
- Citations
- 750
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1214/ss/1177010269