2PLM下缺失数据处理方法及其比较

项目反应理论(IRT)是用于客观测量的现代教育与心理测量理论之一,广泛用于缺失数据十分常见的大尺度测验分析。IRT中两参数逻辑斯蒂克模型(2PLM)下仅有完全随机缺失机制下缺失反应和缺失能力处理的EM算法。本研究推导2PLM下缺失反应忽略的EM 算法,并提出随机缺失机制下缺失反应和缺失能力处理的EM算法和考虑能力估计和作答反应不确定性的多重借补法。研究显示：在各种缺失机制、缺失比例和测验设计下,缺失反应忽略的EM算法和多重借补法表现理想。     

Simple imputation methods versus direct likelihood analysis for missing item scores in multilevel educational data

Missing data, such as item responses in multilevel data, are ubiquitous in educational research settings. Researchers in the item response theory (IRT) context have shown that ignoring such missing data can create problems in the estimation of the IRT model parameters. Consequently, several imputation methods for dealing with missing item data have been proposed and shown to be effective when applied with traditional IRT models. Additionally, a nonimputation direct likelihood analysis has been shown to be an effective tool for handling missing observations in clustered data settings. This study investigates the performance of six simple imputation methods, which have been found to be useful in other IRT contexts, versus a direct likelihood analysis, in multilevel data from educational settings. Multilevel item response data were simulated on the basis of two empirical data sets, and some of the item scores were deleted, such that they were missing either completely at random or simply at random. An explanatory IRT model was used for modeling the complete, incomplete, and imputed data sets. We showed that direct likelihood analysis of the incomplete data sets produced unbiased parameter estimates that were comparable to those from a complete data analysis. Multiple-imputation approaches of the two-way mean and corrected item mean substitution methods displayed varying degrees of effectiveness in imputing data that in turn could produce unbiased parameter estimates. The simple random imputation, adjusted random imputation, item means substitution, and regression imputation methods seemed to be less effective in imputing missing item scores in multilevel data settings.     

Best practices for missing data management in counseling psychology

This article urges counseling psychology researchers to recognize and report how missing data are handled, because consumers of research cannot accurately interpret findings without knowing the amount and pattern of missing data or the strategies that were used to handle those data. Patterns of missing data are reviewed, and some of the common strategies for dealing with them are described. The authors provide an illustration in which data were simulated and evaluate 3 methods of handling missing data: mean substitution, multiple imputation, and full information maximum likelihood. Results suggest that mean substitution is a poor method for handling missing data, whereas both multiple imputation and full information maximum likelihood are recommended alternatives to this approach. The authors suggest that researchers fully consider and report the amount and pattern of missing data and the strategy for handling those data in counseling psychology research and that editors advise researchers of this expectation.     

Multiple Imputation of Item Scores in Test and Questionnaire Data,and Influence on Psychometric Results

The performance of five simple multiple imputation methods for dealing with missing data were compared. In addition, random imputation and multivariate normal imputation were used as lower and upper benchmark, respectively. Test data were simulated and item scores were deleted such that they were either missing completely at random, missing at random, or not missing at random. Cronbach's alpha, Loevinger's scalability coefficient H, and the item cluster solution from Mokken scale analysis of the complete data were compared with the corresponding results based on the data including imputed scores. The multiple-imputation methods, two-way with normally distributed errors, corrected item-mean substitution with normally distributed errors, and response function, produced discrepancies in Cronbach's coefficient alpha, Loevinger's coefficient H, and the cluster solution from Mokken scale analysis, that were smaller than the discrepancies in upper benchmark multivariate normal imputation.     

计划缺失设计——通过有意缺失让研究更高效

缺失值是社会科学研究中非常普遍的现象。全息极大似然估计和多重插补是目前处理缺失值最有效的方法。计划缺失设计利用特殊的实验设计有意产生缺失值, 再用现代的缺失值处理方法来完成统计分析, 获得无偏的统计结果。计划缺失设计可用于横断面调查减少(或增加)问卷长度和纵向调查减少测量次数, 也可用于提高测量有效性。常用的计划缺失设计有三式设计和两种方法测量。     

认知诊断缺失数据处理方法的比较：零替换、多重插补与极大似然估计法

数据缺失在测验中经常发生, 认知诊断评估也不例外, 数据缺失会导致诊断结果的偏差。首先, 通过模拟研究在多种实验条件下比较了常用的缺失数据处理方法。结果表明：(1)缺失数据导致估计精确性下降, 随着人数与题目数量减少、缺失率增大、题目质量降低, 所有方法的PCCR均下降, Bias绝对值和RMSE均上升。(2)估计题目参数时, EM法表现最好, 其次是MI, FIML和ZR法表现不稳定。(3)估计被试知识状态时, EM和FIML表现最好, MI和ZR表现不稳定。其次, 在PISA2015实证数据中进一步探索了不同方法的表现。综合模拟和实证研究结果, 推荐选用EM或FIML法进行缺失数据处理。     

Using the expectation maximization algorithm to estimate coefficient alpha for scales with item-level missing data

A 2-step approach for obtaining internal consistency reliability estimates with item-level missing data is outlined. In the 1st step, a covariance matrix and mean vector are obtained using the expectation maximization (EM) algorithm. In the 2nd step, reliability analyses are carried out in the usual fashion using the EM covariance matrix as input. A Monte Carlo simulation examined the impact of 6 variables (scale length, response categories, item correlations, sample size, missing data, and missing data technique) on 3 different outcomes: estimation bias, mean errors, and confidence interval coverage. The 2-step approach using EM consistently yielded the most accurate reliability estimates and produced coverage rates close to the advertised 95% rate. An easy method of implementing the procedure is outlined.     

EM and beyond

The basic theme of the EM algorithm, to repeatedly use complete-data methods to solve incomplete data problems, is also a theme of several more recent statistical techniques. These techniques—multiple imputation, data augmentation, stochastic relaxation, and sampling importance resampling—combine simulation techniques with complete-data methods to attack problems that are difficult or impossible for EM.A preliminary version of this article was the Keynote Address at the 1987 European Meeting of the Psychometric Society June 24–26, 1987 in Enschede, The Netherlands. The author wishes to thank the editor and reviewers for helpful comments.     

Multiple imputation for item scores when test data are factorially complex

Multiple imputation under a two‐way model with error is a simple and effective method that has been used to handle missing item scores in unidimensional test and questionnaire data. Extensions of this method to multidimensional data are proposed. A simulation study is used to investigate whether these extensions produce biased estimates of important statistics in multidimensional data, and to compare them with lower benchmark listwise deletion, two‐way with error and multivariate normal imputation. The new methods produce smaller bias in several psychometrically interesting statistics than the existing methods of two‐way with error and multivariate normal imputation. One of these new methods clearly is preferable for handling missing item scores in multidimensional test data.     

Tests of Homoscedasticity,Normality, and Missing Completely at Random for Incomplete Multivariate Data

Test of homogeneity of covariances (or homoscedasticity) among several groups has many applications in statistical analysis. In the context of incomplete data analysis, tests of homoscedasticity among groups of cases with identical missing data patterns have been proposed to test whether data are missing completely at random (MCAR). These tests of MCAR require large sample sizes n and/or large group sample sizes n _i , and they usually fail when applied to nonnormal data. Hawkins (Technometrics 23:105–110, 1981) proposed a test of multivariate normality and homoscedasticity that is an exact test for complete data when n _i are small. This paper proposes a modification of this test for complete data to improve its performance, and extends its application to test of homoscedasticity and MCAR when data are multivariate normal and incomplete. Moreover, it is shown that the statistic used in the Hawkins test in conjunction with a nonparametric k-sample test can be used to obtain a nonparametric test of homoscedasticity that works well for both normal and nonnormal data. It is explained how a combination of the proposed normal-theory Hawkins test and the nonparametric test can be employed to test for homoscedasticity, MCAR, and multivariate normality. Simulation studies show that the newly proposed tests generally outperform their existing competitors in terms of Type I error rejection rates. Also, a power study of the proposed tests indicates good power. The proposed methods use appropriate missing data imputations to impute missing data. Methods of multiple imputation are described and one of the methods is employed to confirm the result of our single imputation methods. Examples are provided where multiple imputation enables one to identify a group or groups whose covariance matrices differ from the majority of other groups.     

2PL模型的两种马尔可夫蒙特卡洛缺失数据处理方法比较

马尔科夫蒙特卡洛（MCMC）是项目反应理论中处理缺失数据的一种典型方法。文章通过模拟研究比较了在不同被试人数,项目数,缺失比例下两种MCMC方法（M-H within Gibbs和DA-T Gibbs）参数估计的精确性,并结合了实证研究。研究结果表明,两种方法是有差异的,项目参数估计均受被试人数影响很大,受缺失比例影响相对更小。在样本较大缺失比例较小时,M-H within Gibbs参数估计的均方误差（RMSE）相对略小,随着样本数的减少或缺失比例的增加,DA-T Gibbs方法逐渐优于M-H within Gibbs方法     

Investigation of Multiple Imputation in Low-Quality Questionnaire Data

The performance of multiple imputation in questionnaire data has been studied in various simulation studies. However, in practice, questionnaire data are usually more complex than simulated data. For example, items may be counterindicative or may have unacceptably low factor loadings on every subscale, or completely missing subscales may complicate computations. In this article, it was studied how well multiple imputation recovered the results of several psychometrically important statistics in a data set with such properties. Analysis of this data set revealed that multiple imputation was able to recover the results of these analyses well. Also, a simulation study showed that multiple imputation produced small bias in these statistics for simulated data sets with the same properties.     

Dual imputation model for incomplete longitudinal data

Missing values are a practical issue in the analysis of longitudinal data. Multiple imputation (MI) is a well‐known likelihood‐based method that has optimal properties in terms of efficiency and consistency if the imputation model is correctly specified. Doubly robust (DR) weighing‐based methods protect against misspecification bias if one of the models, but not necessarily both, for the data or the mechanism leading to missing data is correct. We propose a new imputation method that captures the simplicity of MI and protection from the DR method. This method integrates MI and DR to protect against misspecification of the imputation model under a missing at random assumption. Our method avoids analytical complications of missing data particularly in multivariate settings, and is easy to implement in standard statistical packages. Moreover, the proposed method works very well with an intermittent pattern of missingness when other DR methods can not be used. Simulation experiments show that the proposed approach achieves improved performance when one of the models is correct. The method is applied to data from the fireworks disaster study, a randomized clinical trial comparing therapies in disaster‐exposed children. We conclude that the new method increases the robustness of imputations.     

Postmodeling Sensitivity Analysis to Detect the Effect of Missing Data Mechanisms

Incomplete or missing data is a common problem in almost all areas of empirical research. It is well known that simple and ad hoc methods such as complete case analysis or mean imputation can lead to biased and/or inefficient estimates. The method of maximum likelihood works well; however, when the missing data mechanism is not one of missing completely at random (MCAR) or missing at random (MAR), it too can result in incorrect inference. Statistical tests for MCAR have been proposed, but these are restricted to a certain class of problems. The idea of sensitivity analysis as a means to detect the missing data mechanism has been proposed in the statistics literature in conjunction with selection models where conjointly the data and missing data mechanism are modeled. Our approach is different here in that we do not model the missing data mechanism but use the data at hand to examine the sensitivity of a given model to the missing data mechanism. Our methodology is meant to raise a flag for researchers when the assumptions of MCAR (or MAR) do not hold. To our knowledge, no specific proposal for sensitivity analysis has been set forth in the area of structural equation models (SEM). This article gives a specific method for performing postmodeling sensitivity analysis using a statistical test and graphs. A simulation study is performed to assess the methodology in the context of structural equation models. This study shows success of the method, especially when the sample size is 300 or more and the percentage of missing data is 20% or more. The method is also used to study a set of real data measuring physical and social self-concepts in 463 Nigerian adolescents using a factor analysis model.     

How to handle missing data: A comparison of different approaches

Many researchers face the problem of missing data in longitudinal research. Especially, high risk samples are characterized by missing data which can complicate analyses and the interpretation of results. In the current study, our aim was to find the most optimal and best method to deal with the missing data in a specific study with many missing data on the outcome variable. Therefore, different techniques to handle missing data were evaluated, and a solution to efficiently handle substantial amounts of missing data was provided. A simulation study was conducted to determine the most optimal method to deal with the missing data. Results revealed that multiple imputation (MI) using predictive mean matching was the most optimal method with respect to lowest bias and the smallest confidence interval (CI) while maintaining power. Listwise deletion and last observation carried backward also scored acceptable with respect to bias; however, CIs were much larger and sample size almost halved using these methods. Longitudinal research in high risk samples could benefit from using MI in future research to handle missing data. The paper ends with a checklist for handling missing data.     

Weighted least squares fitting using ordinary least squares algorithms

A general approach for fitting a model to a data matrix by weighted least squares (WLS) is studied. This approach consists of iteratively performing (steps of) existing algorithms for ordinary least squares (OLS) fitting of the same model. The approach is based on minimizing a function that majorizes the WLS loss function. The generality of the approach implies that, for every model for which an OLS fitting algorithm is available, the present approach yields a WLS fitting algorithm. In the special case where the WLS weight matrix is binary, the approach reduces to missing data imputation.This research has been made possible by a fellowship from the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences to the author.     

A Comparison of Imputation Strategies for Ordinal Missing Data on Likert Scale Variables

This article compares a variety of imputation strategies for ordinal missing data on Likert scale variables (number of categories = 2, 3, 5, or 7) in recovering reliability coefficients, mean scale scores, and regression coefficients of predicting one scale score from another. The examined strategies include imputing using normal data models with naïve rounding/without rounding, using latent variable models, and using categorical data models such as discriminant analysis and binary logistic regression (for dichotomous data only), multinomial and proportional odds logistic regression (for polytomous data only). The result suggests that both the normal model approach without rounding and the latent variable model approach perform well for either dichotomous or polytomous data regardless of sample size, missing data proportion, and asymmetry of item distributions. The discriminant analysis approach also performs well for dichotomous data. Naïvely rounding normal imputations or using logistic regression models to impute ordinal data are not recommended as they can potentially lead to substantial bias in all or some of the parameters.     

缺失数据处理的期望-极大化算法与马尔可夫蒙特卡洛方法

缺失数据普遍存在于心理学研究中, 影响着统计推断。极大似然估计(MLE)与基于贝叶斯的多重借补(MI)是处理缺失数据的两类重要方法。期望-极大化算法(EM)是寻求MLE的一种强有力的方法。马尔可夫蒙特卡洛方法(MCMC)可以相对简易地实现MI, 而且可以适用于复杂情况下的缺失数据处理。结合研究的需要讨论了实现这两类方法的适用软件。     

Methods for Mediation Analysis with Missing Data

Despite wide applications of both mediation models and missing data techniques, formal discussion of mediation analysis with missing data is still rare. We introduce and compare four approaches to dealing with missing data in mediation analysis including listwise deletion, pairwise deletion, multiple imputation (MI), and a two-stage maximum likelihood (TS-ML) method. An R package bmem is developed to implement the four methods for mediation analysis with missing data in the structural equation modeling framework, and two real examples are used to illustrate the application of the four methods. The four methods are evaluated and compared under MCAR, MAR, and MNAR missing data mechanisms through simulation studies. Both MI and TS-ML perform well for MCAR and MAR data regardless of the inclusion of auxiliary variables and for AV-MNAR data with auxiliary variables. Although listwise deletion and pairwise deletion have low power and large parameter estimation bias in many studied conditions, they may provide useful information for exploring missing mechanisms.