Effects of Missing Data Methods in SEM Under Conditions of Incomplete and Nonnormal Data

References

• Allison, P. (2002). Missing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Arminger, G., & Rothe, G. (1993). ML and pseudo-ML estimation in covariance structure models for nonnormal distribution: A simulation study. In D. Krebs & P. Schmidt (Eds.), New directions in attitude measurement (pp. 266–276). New York and Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• 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: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Bandalos, D., & Leite, W. (2013). Use of Monte Carlos studies in structural equation modeling research. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Muller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 625–666). Charlotte: NC: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Boomsma, A. (2013). Reporting Monte Carlo studies in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 20, 518–540.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley, J. V. (1978). Robustness? British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 31, 144–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Browne, M. W. (1982). Covariance structures. In D. M. Hawkins (Eds.), Topics in applied multivariate analysis (pp. 72–141). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, R. L. (1990). The robustness of 2SLS estimation of a non-normally distributed confirmatory factor analysis model. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 455–466.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chou, C. P., Bentler, P. M., & Satorra, A. (1991). Scaled test statistics and robust standard errors for non-normal data in covariance structure analysis: A Monte Carlo study. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 44, 347–357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, L. M., Schafer, J. L., & Kam, C. M. (2001). A comparison of inclusive and restrictive strategies in modern missing-data procedures. Psychological Methods, 6, 330–351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davey, A., Savla, J., & Luo, Z. (2005). Issues in evaluating model fit with missing data. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 578–597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enders, C. K. (2001a). The impact of nonnormality on full information maximum-likelihood estimation for structural equation models with missing data. Psychological Methods, 6, 352–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enders, C. K. (2001b). A primer on maximum likelihood algorithms available for use with missing data. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 128–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan, X., & Wang, L. (1998). Effects of potential confounding factors on fit indices and parameter estimates for true and misspecified models. Structural Equation Modeling, 5, 701–735.
   Google Scholar
• Finch, J. F., West, S. G., & MacKinnon, D. P. (1997). Effects of sample size and nonnormality on the estimation of mediated effects in latent variable models. Structural Equation Modeling, 4, 87–105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleishman, A. I. (1978). A method for simulating non-normal distributions. Psychometrika, 43, 521–531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gold, M. S., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Treatments of missing data: A Monte Carlo comparison of SRPI, iterative stochastic regression imputation, and expectation-maximization. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 319–355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, J. W., Hofer, S. M., & MacKinnon, D. P. (1996). Maximizing the usefulness of data obtained with planned missing value patterns: An application of maximum likelihood procedures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 31, 197–218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Handcock, M. S., Rendall, M. S., & Cheadle, J. E. (2005). Improved regression estimation of a multivariate relationship with population data on the bivariate relationship. Sociological Methodology, 35, 303–346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harwell, M. R. (1997). Analyzing the results of Monte Carlo studies in item response theory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 266–279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, N. J., & Laird, N. M. (2001). Maximum likelihood analysis of logistic regression models with incomplete covariate data and auxiliary information. Biometrics, 57, 34–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoyle, R. H. (1995). Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, L., Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1992). Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted? Psychological Bulletin, 112, 351–362.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). PRELIS 2 user's reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, D. (1995). The impact of BIB spiraling-induced missing data patterns on goodness-of-fit tests in factor analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 20, 69–82.
   Google Scholar
• Lei, M., & Lomax, R. G. (2005). The effect of varying degrees on nonnormality in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 1–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, K. H., Meng, X. L., Raghunathan, T. E., & Rubin, D. B. (1991). Significance levels from repeated p-values with multiply-imputed data. Statistica Sinica, 1, 65–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Little, R. J. A. (1992). Regression with missing X's: A review. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87, 1227–1237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Micceri, T. (1989). The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 156–166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1992). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables: A note on the size of the model. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 19–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, B., Kaplan, D., & Hollis, M. (1987). On structural equation modeling with data that are not missing completely at random. Psychometrika, 52, 431–462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olejnik, S., & Algina, J. (2003). Generalized eta and omega squared statistics: Measures of effect size for some common research designs. Psychological Methods, 8, 434–447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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, 151, 53–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paxton, P., Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Kirby, J., & Chen, F. (2001). Monte Carlo experiments: Design and implementation. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 287–312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell, D. A., & Schafer, W. D. (2001). The robustness of the likelihood ratio chi-square test of structural equation models: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 26, 105–132.
   Google Scholar
• Robey, R. R. & Barcikowski, R. S. (1992). Type I error and the number of iterations in Monte Carlo studies of robustness. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 283–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubin, D. B. (1976). Inference and missing data. Biometrika, 63, 581–592.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Satorra, A. (1989). Alternative test criteria in covariance structure analysis: A unified approach. Psychometrika, 54, 131–151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Satorra, A. (1990). Robustness issues in structural equation modeling: A review of recent developments. Quality & Quantity, 24, 367–386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Savalei, V. (2008). Is the ML chi-square ever robust to nonnormality? A cautionary note with missing data. Structural Equation Modeling, 15, 1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savalei, V., & Bentler, P. M. (2009). A two-stage approach to missing data: Theory and application to auxiliary variables. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 477–497.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin, T., Davision, M. L., & Long, J. D. (2009). Effects of missing data methods in structural equation modeling with nonnormal longitudinal data. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 70–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vale, C. D., & Maurelli, V. A. (1983). Simulating multivariate non-normal distributions. Psychometrika, 48, 465–471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wothke, W. (2000). Longitudinal and multi-group modeling with missing data. In T. D. Little, K. U. Schnabel & J. Baumert (Eds.), Modeling longitudinal and multiple group data: Practical issues, applied approach and specific examples (pp. 219–240). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Yuan, K. H., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Three likelihood-based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. In M. Becker & M. Sobel (Eds.), Sociological methodology 2000 (pp. 165–200). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Yuan, K. H., Yang-Wallentin, F., & Bentler, P. M. (2012). ML Versus MI for missing data with violation of distribution conditions. Sociological Methods & Research, 41, 598–629.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar