TY - JOUR
T1 - Planned missing data designs with small sample sizes: How small is too small?
T2 - How small is too small?
AU - Jia, Fan
AU - Kinai, Richard
AU - Crowe, Kelly S.
AU - Schoemann, Alexander M.
AU - Little, Todd
AU - Moore, Whitney G.
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported by grant NSF 1053160 (Wei Wu & Todd D. Little, co-PIs) and by the Center for Research Methods and Data Analysis at the University of Kansas (when Todd D. Little was director; 2009–2013). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding agencies. Todd D. Little is now director of the Institute for Measurement, Methodology, Analysis, and Policy at Texas Tech University.
PY - 2014/9
Y1 - 2014/9
N2 - Utilizing planned missing data (PMD) designs (ex. 3-form surveys) enables researchers to ask participants fewer questions during the data collection process. An important question, however, is just how few participants are needed to effectively employ planned missing data designs in research studies. This article explores this question by using simulated three-form planned missing data to assess analytic model convergence, parameter estimate bias, standard error bias, mean squared error (MSE), and relative efficiency (RE).Three models were examined: a one-time-point, cross-Sectional model with 3 constructs; a two-time-point model with 3 constructs at each time point; and a three-time-point, mediation model with 3 constructs over three time points. Both full-information maximum likelihood (FIML) and multiple imputation (MI) were used to handle the missing data. Models were found to meet convergence rate and acceptable bias criteria with FIML at smaller sample sizes than with MI.
AB - Utilizing planned missing data (PMD) designs (ex. 3-form surveys) enables researchers to ask participants fewer questions during the data collection process. An important question, however, is just how few participants are needed to effectively employ planned missing data designs in research studies. This article explores this question by using simulated three-form planned missing data to assess analytic model convergence, parameter estimate bias, standard error bias, mean squared error (MSE), and relative efficiency (RE).Three models were examined: a one-time-point, cross-Sectional model with 3 constructs; a two-time-point model with 3 constructs at each time point; and a three-time-point, mediation model with 3 constructs over three time points. Both full-information maximum likelihood (FIML) and multiple imputation (MI) were used to handle the missing data. Models were found to meet convergence rate and acceptable bias criteria with FIML at smaller sample sizes than with MI.
KW - 3-form survey
KW - Full information maximum likelihood (FIML)
KW - Multiple imputation (MI)
KW - Planned missing data designs
KW - Simulation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84905664107&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0165025414531095
DO - 10.1177/0165025414531095
M3 - Article
SN - 0165-0254
VL - 38
SP - 435
EP - 452
JO - Default journal
JF - Default journal
IS - 5
ER -