Cited by 1,834Statistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods and ApplicationsAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

Analyzing Incomplete Political Science Data: An Alternative Algorithm for Multiple Imputation

King, Gary, Honaker, James, Joseph, Anne, Scheve, Kenneth·2001·American Political Science Review

Abstract

We propose a remedy for the discrepancy between the way political scientists analyze data with missing values and the recommendations of the statistics community. Methodologists and statisticians agree that “multiple imputation” is a superior approach to the problem of missing data scattered through one’s explanatory and dependent variables than the methods currently used in applied data analysis. The discrepancy occurs because the computational algorithms used to apply the best multiple imputation models have been slow, difficult to implement, impossible to run with existing commercial statistical packages, and have demanded considerable expertise. We adapt an algorithm and use it to implement a general-purpose, multiple imputation model for missing data. This algorithm is considerably faster and easier to use than the leading method recommended in the statistics literature. We also quantify the risks of current missing data practices, illustrate how to use the new procedure, and evaluate this alternative through simulated data as well as actual empirical examples. Finally, we offer easy-to-use software that implements all methods discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0003055401000235

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Missing data were imputed through multiple imputation with Stata using MICE, generating five imputed data sets.

    “Missing data were imputed through multiple imputation with Stata using the MICE (multivariate imputation by chained equations) module (Royston, 2004).Five imputed data sets were generated.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
King, G., Honaker, J., Joseph, A., & Scheve, K.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Yale University (US)
Venue
American Political Science Review
Published
2001-03
Volume
95
Issue
1
Pages
49-69
ISSN
  • 0003-0554 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5943
OpenAlex
W2150924432
Cited by
1,834
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 80 · 2019: 77 · 2018: 82 · 2017: 62 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 85 · 2014: 107 · 2013: 101 · 2012: 127
FWCI
64.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Political Science Review (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Berkley Law Scholarship Repository (University of California, Berkeley) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Keywords
multiple imputation, missing data, imputation algorithm, computational efficiency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review