This Monte Carlo study investigates the beneficiary effect of including auxiliary variables during estimation of confirmatory factor analysis models with multiple imputation. Specifically, it examines the influence of sample size, missing rates, missingness mechanism combinations, missingness types (linear or convex), and the absence or presence of the auxiliary variables on convergence failure, bias, standard error, and confidence interval coverage of parameters. Including auxiliary variables in the imputation model is found to improve parameter estimation in most cases, particularly with the convex type of missingness and the nonignorable cases caused by MAR and absence of auxiliary variables in the imputation model. The results of this study can be applied to test validity studies where item selection is needed because of the presence of many alternative items (e.g., instrument development from an item bank). Implications and recommendations for proper imputation are discussed.
Allison, P.D. ( 2003). Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling . Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 545-557.
3.
Arbuckle, J.L. ( 1996). Full information estimation in the presence of incomplete data. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling (pp. 243-277). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
Barnard, J., & Meng, X. ( 1999). Applications of multiple imputation in medical studies: From AIDS to NHANES. Statistical Methods in Medical Research , 8, 17-36.
5.
Brown, R.L. ( 1994). Efficacy of the indirect approach for estimating structural equation models with missing data: A comparison of five methods . Structural Equation Modeling, 1, 287-316.
6.
Collins, L.M., Schafer, J.L., & Kam, C. ( 2001). A comparison of inclusive and restrictive strategies in modern missing data procedures. Psychological Methods, 6, 330-351.
7.
Enders, C.K. ( 2001). The impact of nonnormality on full information maximum-likelihood estimation for structural equation models with missing data. Psychological Methods, 6, 352-370.
8.
Enders, C.K. ( 2006). Analyzing structural equation models with missing data . In G. Hancock & R. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 313-342). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
9.
Enders, C.K., & Bandalos, D.L. (2001). The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 430-457.
10.
Enders, C.K., & Peugh, J.L. ( 2004). Using an EM covariance matrix to estimate structural equation models with missing data: Choosing an adjusted sample size to improve the accuracy of inferences. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 1-19.
11.
Gelman, A., Carlin, J.B., Stern, H.S., & Rubin, D.B. ( 1995). Bayesian data analysis. London : Chapman & Hall.
12.
Gold, M.S., & Bentler, P.M. ( 2000). Treatments of missing data: A Monte Carlo comparison of RBHDI, iterative stochastic regression imputation, and expectation-maximization . Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 319-355.
13.
Gold, M.S., Bentler, P.M., & Kim, K.H. ( 2003). A comparison of maximum-likelihood and asymptotically distribution-free methods of treating incomplete nonnormal data. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 47-79.
Horton, N.J., & Kleinman, K.P. (2007). Much ado about nothing: A comparison of missing data methods and software to fit incomplete data regression models. The American Statistician, 61, 79-90.
16.
Joreskog, K., & Sorbom, D. ( 1993). PRELIS 2: User’s reference guide. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International .
17.
Little, R.J.A., & Rubin, D.B. ( 2002). Statistical analysis with missing data (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
18.
Marsh, H.W. ( 1998). Pairwise deletion for missing data in structural equation models: Nonpositive definite matrices, parameter estimates, goodness of fit, and adjusted sample sizes. Structural Equation Modeling , 5, 22-36.
19.
Marsh, H.W., Ellis, L., Parada, L., Richards, G., & Heubeck, B.G. ( 2005). A short version of the Self Description Questionnaire II: Operationalizing criteria for short-form evaluation with new applications of confirmatory factor analyses. Psychological Assessment , 17, 81-102.
20.
Muthen, B., Kaplan, D., & Hollis, M. ( 1987). On structural equation modeling with data that are not missing completely at random. Psychometrika, 52, 431-462.
21.
Newman, D.A. ( 2003). Longitudinal modeling with randomly and systematically missing data: A simulation of ad hoc, maximum likelihood, and multiple imputation techniques. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 328-362.
22.
Olinsky, A., Chen, S., & Harlow, L. ( 2003). The comparative efficacy of imputation methods for missing data in structural equation modeling. European Journal of Operational Research, 15, 53-79.
23.
Rubin, D.B. ( 1996). Multiple imputation after 18 + years. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 473-489.
24.
SAS Institute. (2001). The SAS system for windows. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
25.
Savalei, V., & Bentler, P.M. ( 2005). A statistically justified pairwise ML method for incomplete nonnormal data: A comparison with direct ML and pairwise ADF. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 183-214.
26.
Schafer, J.L. ( 1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. New York: Chapman & Hall.
27.
Schafer, J.L. ( 1999). Software for multiple imputation. Retrieved August 26, 2008, http://www.stat . psu.edu/~jls/misoftwa.html
28.
Schafer, J.L., & Graham, J.W. ( 2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art . Psychological Methods, 7, 147-177.
29.
Schafer, J.L., & Olsen, M.K. ( 1998). Multiple imputation for multivariate missing data problems: A data analyst’s perspective. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 545-571.
30.
Van Buuren, S., Boshuizen, H.C., & Knook, D.L. ( 1999). Multiple imputation of missing blood pressure covariates in survival analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 18, 681-694.
31.
Wothke, W. ( 2000). Longitudinal and multi-group modeling with missing data . In T. D. Little, K. U.Schnabel, & J. Baumer (Eds.), Modeling longitudinal and multiple group data: Practical issues, applied approaches, and specific examples (pp. 219-240). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
