Donor limited hot deck imputation: effects on parameter estimation

• Autorzy: Joenssen D. W. , Bankhofer U.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Methods for dealing with missing data in the context of large surveys or data mining projects are limited by the computational complexity that they may exhibit. Hot deck imputation methods are computationally simple, yet effective for creating complete data sets from which correct inferences may be drawn. All hot deck methods draw values for the imputation of missing values from the data matrix that will later be analyzed. The object, from which these available values are taken for imputation within another, is called the donor. This duplication of values may lead to the problem that using any donor “too often” will induce incorrect estimates. To mitigate this dilemma some hot deck methods limit the amount of times any one donor may be selected. This study answers which conditions influence whether or not any such limitation is sensible for six different hot deck methods. In addition, five factors that influence the strength of any such advantage are identified and possibilities for further research are discussed.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

hot deck imputation; missing data; non-response; imputation; simulation

• Wydawca: Komisja Informatyki Polskiej Akademii Nauk, Oddział w Gdańsku
• Czasopismo: Journal of Theoretical and Applied Computer Science
• Rocznik: 2012
• Tom: Vol. 6, nr 3
• Strony: 58--70
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 29 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Joenssen D. W.

autor

Bankhofer U.

• Technische Universität Ilmenau, Germany,

Bibliografia

• [1] Allison P.D.: Missing Data, Sage University Papers Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Thousand Oaks, 2001.
• [2] Andridge R.R., Little R.J.A.: A Review of Hot Deck Imputation for Survey Non-Response. International Statistical Review, 78, 1, pp. 40–64, 2010.
• [3] Bankhofer U.: Unvollst¨andige Daten- und Distanzmatrizen in der Multivariaten Datenanalyse. Eul, Bergisch Gladbach, 1995.
• [4] Barzi F., Woodward M.: Imputations of Missing Values in Practice: Results from Imputations of Serum Cholesterol in 28 Cohort Studies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 160, pp. 34–45, 2004.
• [5] Bortz J., D¨oring N.: Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation f¨ur Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler. Springer, Berlin, 2009.
• [6] Brick J.M., Kalton G.: Handling Missing Data in Survey Research. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 5, pp. 215–238, 1996.
• [7] Brooks C.A., Bailar B.A.: An Error Profile: Employment as Measured by the Current Population Survey. Statistical Policy Working Paper 3. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1978.
• [8] Cario M.C., Nelson B.L.: Modeling and Generating Random Vectors with Arbitrary Marginal Distributions and Correlation Matrix. Northwestern University, IEMS Technical Report, 50, pp. 100–150, 1997.
• [9] Cohen J.: A Power Primer. Quantitative Methods in Psychology, 112, pp. 155–159, 1992.
• [10] Durrant G.B.: Imputation Methods for Handling Item-Nonresponse in Practice: Methodological Issues and Recent Debates. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12, pp. 293–304, 2009.
• [11] Ford B.: An Overview of Hot-Deck Procedures. In: W. Madow, H. Nisselson, I. Olkin (Eds.): Incomplete Data in Sample Surveys, 2, Theory and Bibliographies. Academic Press, pp. 185–207, 1983.
• [12] Fr¨ohlich M., Pieter A.: Cohen’s Effektst¨arken als Mass der Bewertung von praktischer Relevanz – Implikationen f¨ur die Praxis. Schweizerische Zeitschrift f¨ur Sportmedizin und Sporttraumatologie, 57, 4, pp. 139–142, 2009.
• [13] Kaiser J.: The Effectiveness of Hot-Deck Procedures in Small Samples. Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods, American Statistical Association, pp. 523–528, 1983.
• [14] Kalton G., Kasprzyk D.: Imputing for Missing Survey Responses. Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods, American Statistical Association, pp. 22–31, 1982.
• [15] Kalton G., Kasprzyk D.: The Treatment of Missing Survey Data. Survey Methodology, 12, pp. 1–16, 1986.
• [16] Kalton G., Kish L.: Two Efficient Random Imputation Procedures. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section 1981, pp. 146–151, 1981.
• [17] Kim J.O., Curry J.: The Treatment of Missing Data in Multivariate Analysis. Sociological Methods and Research, 6, pp. 215–240, 1977.
• [18] Kim W., Choi B., Hong E., Kim S., Lee D.: A Taxonomy of Dirty Data. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 7, 1, pp. 81–99, 2003.
• [19] Little R.J., Rubin D.B.: Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. New York, Wiley, 1987.
• [20] Marker D.A., Judkins D.R.,Winglee M.: Large-Scale Imputation for Complex Surveys. In: Groves R.M., Dillman D.A., Eltinge J.L., Little R.J.A. (Eds.): Survey Nonresponse. John Wiley and Sons, pp. 329–341, 2001.
• [21] Nordholt E.S.: Imputation: methods, simulation experiments and practical examples. International Statistical Review, 66, pp. 157–180, 1998. 70 Dieter William Joenssen, Udo Bankhofer
• [22] Pearson R.: Mining Imperfect Data. Philadelphia, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2005.
• [23] Roth P.L.: Missing Data in Multiple Item Scales: A Monte Carlo Analysis of Missing Data Techniques. Organizational Research Methods, 2, pp. 211–232, 1999.
• [24] Roth P.L., Switzer III F.S.: A Monte Carlo Analysis of Missing Data Techniques in a HRM Setting. Journal of Management, 21, pp. 1003–1023, 1995.
• [25] Rubin D.B.: Inference and Missing Data (with discussion). Biometrika 63, pp. 581–592, 1976.
• [26] Sande I.: Hot-Deck Imputation Procedures. In: W. Madow, H. Nisselson, I. Olkin (Eds.): Incomplete Data in Sample Surveys, 3, Theory and Bibliographies. Academic Press, pp. 339–349, 1983.
• [27] Siddique J., Belin T.R.: Multiple Imputation Using an Iterative Hot-Deck with Distance-Based Donor Selection. Statistics in medicine, 27, 1, pp. 83–102, 2008.
• [28] Strike K., Emam K.E., Madhavji N.: Software Cost Estimation with Incomplete Data. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 27, pp. 890–908, 2001.
• [29] Yenduri S., Iyengar S.S.: Performance Evaluation of Imputation Methods for Incomplete Datasets. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 17, pp. 127–152, 2007.