Missing data in experiments: Challenges and solutions.
Author(s) -
Robin Gomila,
Chelsey S. Clark
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
psychological methods
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.981
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1939-1463
pISSN - 1082-989X
DOI - 10.1037/met0000361
Subject(s) - missing data , inverse probability weighting , weighting , computer science , causal inference , statistics , data mining , imputation (statistics) , econometrics , machine learning , mathematics , estimator , medicine , radiology
Missing data is a common feature of experimental datasets. Standard methods used by psychology researchers to handle missingness rely on unrealistic assumptions, invalidate random assignment procedures, and bias estimates of effect sizes. We describe different classes of missing data typically encountered in experimental datasets, and we discuss how each of them impacts researchers' causal inferences. In this tutorial, we provide concrete guidelines for handling each class of missingness, focusing on 2 methods that make realistic assumptions: (a) inverse probability weighting (IPW) for mild instances of missingness, and (b) double sampling and bounds for severe instances of missingness. After reviewing the reasons why these methods increase the accuracy of researchers' estimates of effect sizes, we provide lines of R code that researchers may use in their own analyses. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom