Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: st: Missingness
From
"Justina Fischer" <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: Missingness
Date
Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:37:44 +0200
the 'missing variable' indicator was rejected as collinear because you probably did not recode the underlying categorical variable. Then the indicator variable is indeed 100% collinear with the missings in your original categorical variable.
Justina
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:07:22 +0100
> Von: Nick Cox <[email protected]>
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: st: Missingness
> Your strategy isn't clear. Regardless of whether or how you use an
> extra missingness variable, how do you expect Stata to treat the
> missing values in the variables you already have? Also, are the
> ordinal predictors being treated as ordinal? Is the response ordinal
> and does it include missing values too? One way forward is to treat
> "missing" as just another category with its own code, but that would
> seem to oblige you to treat such variables as nominal (in practice as
> equivalent indicator variables) -- unless somehow you know that
> "missing" always means "very big" or "very small" or "zero" and so can
> be placed or one end or within the order.
>
> Nick
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Brendan Churchill
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I am using some ordinal variables, which have some numeric missing
> values, in a multilevel model. In some previous research, I have seen
> researchers include a 'Missing' independent variable in their model to account for
> some of the 'missingness' - or rather to control for the missing values, but
> I don't quite understand how to do it in Stata or even if that's a good way
> to do it. I've tried to make a binary variable in which the missing values
> are coded 1 and the rest of the values are coded 0 but the model rejects
> this because it's collinear.
> >
> > Is this how you do it? Or is there a variable for the entire data set
> that is created to account for all missing variables?
> >
> > I'd great appreciate any advice or assistance anyone out there could
> provide
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
--
Justina AV Fischer, PhD
COFIT Fellow
World Trade Institute
University of Bern
homepage: http://www.justinaavfischer.de/
e-mail: [email protected]. [email protected]
papers: http://ideas.repec.org/e/pfi55.html
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/