1 / 19

Muhammad Imran Khan

Using Modern Missing Data Analyses for effective inference about Hunters’ satisfaction towards OFW Program. Muhammad Imran Khan. Motivation of Study. Hunting & fishing are part of Nebraska's heritage NGPC is interested in improving hunter/angler r ecruitment & retention ( NGPC,2008 )

Download Presentation

Muhammad Imran Khan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Using Modern Missing Data Analyses for effective inference about Hunters’ satisfaction towards OFW Program Muhammad Imran Khan

  2. Motivation of Study • Hunting & fishing are part of Nebraska's heritage • NGPC is interested in improving hunter/angler recruitment & retention (NGPC,2008) • Data collected in 2013 to know about hunters’ motivations & satisfactions towards OFW lands • Purpose of this study is to compare estimates using appropriate imputation methods

  3. Missing Data • Missingness in Surveys (Groves et al., 2004) • Noncoverage • Unit Nonresponse • Item Nonresponse • Partial Nonresponse (Brick & Kalton,1996) • Data Entry Error (Anne & Andrea,2014) • Missing data Mechanism(Buuren, 2012) • Missing Completely At Random (MCAR) • Missing At Random (MAR) • Missing Not At Random (MNAR)

  4. How much missing data is “problematic” • Researchers assign some limits: • > 5% (Schafer,1999) • >10% (Benntt,2001) • >20% (Peng et al., 2006) • (Widaman,2006) specified the following scale • 1%-2% (Negligible) • 5%-10% ( Minor) • 10%-25% (Moderate) • 25%-50% (High) • >50% (Excessive) • Important problems of missingness (Bell & Fairclough,2013) • decrease in precision • Increase bias in parameter estimation

  5. NGPC & UNL conducted survey • Sampling frame: hunters who purchased hunting license for hunting in 2012 in NE • The survey contained three parts: • Where, & what hunt; Environment Impact • Motivations(Relatedness, Competence, Autonomy) • Socio-demographic factors • About collected data • Total questions = 42 (used 19 Qus. for analysis) • Sample size = 8181 • Completely filled =1555 (19%) • Unit nonresponse = 627 (8%) • Item nonresponse = 5999 (73%) • Varies from 1 to 8 missingness per respondent in all 19 Qus. 81%

  6. Determining Type of Missing Data • Test for MCAR (Little, 1988) • Little’s Test of MCAR (Omnibus test of all specified variables) • If test is not significant, then data can be assumed MCAR • If test is significant, then Then, data may be MAR or MNAR • For given data test is sig. So data are MAR • 3256.783 with . • Table shows number & percent missing

  7. Data used for analysis • 13 Questions for motivation based on SDT 5 Questions on relatedness transformed to 2 factors

  8. Data used for analysis • 13 Questions for motivation based on SDT 4 Qus. on competence & autonomy transformed each to 1 factor

  9. Model used for the analysis Satisfaction=Rel_1+Rel_2+Comp+Auto+ Educ+Age+Income+H_Days+Harvest

  10. Methods for Handling Missing Data • Deletion or non-imputing methods: • List-wise Deletion (Pigott, 2001) • Pair-wise Deletion (Bennett, 2001) • Nonstochastic or ad-hoc methods: • Mean Imputation (Graham,2003) • Regression Imputation (Qin et.al., 2007) • Stochastic or Establishedmethods: • Stochastic Regression (Todd et al., 2013) • Multiple Imputation(MI) (John, et al., 2007) • Full Information Maximum Likelihood(FIML) • Expectation Maximization (EM)(Yiran& Chao-Ying, 2013)

  11. Mean Imputation

  12. Comparing Results

  13. Multiple Imputation

  14. Comparing Results

  15. Comparing Results

  16. Summary • EM only shows that Releadness_2 is significant • EM estimates smallest standard error for Income • Comparison of Imputation Methods

  17. Thanks for your kind attention Special Thanks to: Dr. Andrew Tyre, Uni. Of Nebraska, Lincoln Dr. Lisa Pennisi, Uni. Of Nebraska, Lincoln Dr. Allan McCutcheon, Uni. Of Nebraska, Lincoln Nebraska Game & Parks Commission

  18. References Anne-Kathrin,F. & Andrea B. (2014). The economic performance of Swiss drinking water utilities. Journal of Prod. Analysis. 41:383-397. doi10.1007/s11123-013-0344-0 Bell, M. L.,& Fairclough,D.L. (2013). Practical and statistical issues in missing data for longitudinal patient reported outcomes. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 0(0), 1-20. doi: 10.1177/0962280213476378 Bennett, D.A. (2001). How can I deal with missing data in my study? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 25, 464-469. Brick, J., & Kalton, J. (1996). Handling missing data in survey research. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 5, 215–238. doi:10.1177/096228029600500302 Buuren, S.V.(2012). Flexible imputation of missing data. Taylor & Francis, FL: CRC Press. John, W. G. & Allison E. O. & Tamika D. G.(2007). How many imputations are really needed? some practical clarifications of multiple imputation theory, Springer,8:206- 213. Graham, J. W. (2003). Adding missing-data-relevant variables to FIML based structuralequationmodels. Structural Equation Modeling, 10,80–100. Groves, R., Fowler, F., Couper, M., Lepkowski, J., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2004). Survey methodology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. Little, R.J.A. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 83, 1198-1202. NGPC (2008). Nebraska 20 year hunter/angler recruitment, development and retention plan. Lincoln, NE. Pigott, T. D. (2001). A Review of Methods for Missing Data. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(4), 353-383. Peng, C.Y., Harwell, M., Liou, S.M., & Ehman, L.H. (2006). Advances in missing data methods and implications for educational research. In S Sawilowsky (Ed.), Real data analysis (pp.31-78), Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Qin,Y.,Zhang,S.,Zhu,X.,Zang,J.,& Zhang,C. (2007). Semi-parametric optimization for missing data imputation. ApplIntell 27,79-88. DOI 10.1007/s10489-006-0032-0 Schafer, J.L. (1999). Multiple imputation: A primer. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. 8: 3-15. Todd D. L., Terrence D. J., Kyle M. L., & Whitney M. (2013). On the joys of missing data. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 1-12. doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jst048 Yiran D. & Chao-Ying J.P.(2013). Principled missing data methods for researchers. Springer, 2:222.

  19. Questions & Comments! are most welcome Contact Information: mik3.stat@gmail.com

More Related