Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » Courses » ap-stat

Topic: 'informative' missing ordinal data
Replies: 1   Last Post: May 8, 1997 12:23 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View  
Joe H Ward

Posts: 743
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: 'informative' missing ordinal data
Posted: May 8, 1997 12:23 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Richard--

I'm not sure what you mean by this statement!
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
> -- NO, you cannot haphazardly include a 'missing' category as an
> extra category when your variables are treated as ORDINAL, that is
> 'ordered', when it is apt to be informative. (If missing is
> 'non-informative' then you might justify re-scoring Missing to be
> the mean, or to be zero... depending.)


In case you did not receive the message below, I'm sending it again.
The approach described below can be quite useful. The "missing data" can
be "missing" for ANY KIND OF VARIABLE, NOMINAL, ORDINAL, ETC.

When a responder chooses NOT to "answer" a paricular item, THAT IS A
RESPONSE!

- Joe
***********************************************************************
* Joe Ward 167 East Arrowhead Dr. *
* Health Careers High School San Antonio, TX 78228-2402 *
* Phone: 210-433-6575 *
* joeward@tenet.edu *
***********************************************************************

-------------------------- EARLIER REPLY TO DICON ------
Subject: Re: 'informative' missing ordinal data

Dicon --

Not sure of your situation but consider the following situation:

Prediction of Y = performance in a highly technical school from GRADE
MADE IN HIGH SCHOOL PHYSICS.

If the high school physics grades are not measured very well, it could be
the case of weather or not a student CHOSE TO TAKE PHYSICS is a good
predictor.


Let

Y = dependent variable (future performance in a highly technical school)

P = 1 IF THE STUDENT CHOSE TO TAKE PHYSICS, 0 OTHERWISE.
G = PHYSICS COURSE GRADE IF THE STUDENT CHOSE TO TAKE PHYSICS, 0 OTHERWISE.
N = 1 IF THE STUDENT DID NOT TAKE PHYSICS, 0 OTHERWISE.
U = 1 for every observation

Y = a1*P + a2*G + a3*N + E1


a1 will be the Y-intercept for the line relating Y to Grade
a2 will be the slope of the line relating Y to Grade
a3 will be the AVERAGE of the Y values for those who DID NOT TAKE PHYSICS.

If you wish to find out if GRADE (FOR THOSE WHO TAKE PHYSICS) can
effectively predict Y then compare model 1 above with the restricted model

Y = b1*P + b3*N + E2

b1 will be the AVERAGE of the Y values for those who TOOK PHYSICS.
b3 will be the AVERAGE of the Y values for those who DID NOT TAKE PHYSICS.


Then if GRADE may not be "significant" (PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE) then it
may be of interest to investigate whether or not CHOOSING TO TAKE PHYSICS
is a good predictor. The new restricted model wold be:

Y = c1*U + E3

c1 will be the AVERAGE of all the elements in Y (THE GRAND MEAN)


A similar example might involve predicting any Y from SELF-REPORTED AGE and
GENDER. Whether or not a respondent CHOOSES TO REPORT AGE may be a
useful predictor, and there could be INTERACTION between SELF-REPORTED AGE
and GENDER.

Yes, MISSING INFORMATION MAY BE "INFORMATIVE"!

-- Joe

***********************************************************************
* Joe Ward 167 East Arrowhead Dr. *
* Health Careers High School San Antonio, TX 78228-2402 *
* Phone: 210-433-6575 *
* joeward@tenet.edu *
***********************************************************************





On Tue, 6 May 1997, SF Ng & SD Montford wrote:

> Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 07:24:16 -0400
> From: SF Ng & SD Montford <daryln@pl.jaring.my>
> To: Multiple recipients of list <edstat-l@jse.stat.ncsu.edu>
> Subject: 'informative' missing ordinal data
>
> I have some missing data for ordinal variables that I believe
> to be 'informative'.
>
> Can I take the fact that the data is missing as part of the analysis
> by including the missing category in the analysis as an extra category.
>
> I assume that no adjustments would have to be made to the df in this
> case.
>
> Dicon Montford <s.d.montford@bham.ac.uk>
>
>


On Tue, 6 May 1997, Richard F Ulrich wrote:

> Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 23:57:16 -0400
> From: Richard F Ulrich <wpilib+@pitt.edu>
> To: Multiple recipients of list <edstat-l@jse.stat.ncsu.edu>
> Subject: Re: 'informative' missing ordinal data
>
> << Dicon Montford <s.d.montford@bham.ac.uk> >>
> SF Ng & SD Montford (daryln@pl.jaring.my) wrote:
> : I have some missing data for ordinal variables that I believe
> : to be 'informative'.
>
> : Can I take the fact that the data is missing as part of the analysis
> : by including the missing category in the analysis as an extra category.
>
> -- NO, you cannot haphazardly include a 'missing' category as an
> extra category when your variables are treated as ORDINAL, that is
> 'ordered', when it is apt to be informative. (If missing is
> 'non-informative' then you might justify re-scoring Missing to be
> the mean, or to be zero... depending.)
>
> If you are analysing as nominal/categorical, then you can just use
> another category, which DOES cost a degree of freedom.
>
>
>
> Rich Ulrich, biostatistician wpilib+@pitt.edu
> http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html Univ. of Pittsburgh
>






Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.