Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 366

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Maximizing the Usefulness of Data Obtained with Planned Missing Value Patterns: An Application of Maximum Likelihood Procedures

Graham, John W., Hofer, Scott M., MacKinnon, David P.·1996·Multivariate Behavioral Research

Abstract

Researchers often face a dilemma: Should they collect little data and emphasize quality, or much data at the expense of quality? The utility of the 3-form design coupled with maximum likelihood methods for estimation of missing values was evaluated. In 3-form design surveys, four sets of items. X, A, B, and C are administered: Each third of the subjects receives X and one combination of two other item sets - AB, BC, or AC. Variances and covariances were estimated with pairwise deletion, mean replacement, single imputation, multiple imputation, raw data maximum likelihood, multiple-group covariance structure modeling, and Expectation-Maximization (EM) algorithm estimation. The simulation demonstrated that maximum likelihood estimation and multiple imputation methods produce the most efficient and least biased estimates of variances and covariances for normally distributed and slightly skewed data when data are missing completely at random (MCAR). Pairwise deletion provided equally unbiased estimates but was less efficient than ML procedures. Further simulation results demonstrated that nun-maximum likelihood methods break down when data are not missing completely at random. Application of these methods with empirical drug use data resulted in similar covariance matrices for pairwise and EM estimation, however, ML estimation produced better and more efficient regression estimates. Maximum likelihood estimation or multiple imputation procedures. which are now becoming more readily available, are always recommended. In order to maximize the efficiency of the ML parameter estimates, it is recommended that scale items be split across forms rather than being left intact within forms.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327906mbr3102_3

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 366

Metadata

Authors
Graham, J. W., Hofer, S. M., & MacKinnon, D. P.
Venue
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Published
1996-04
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
197-218
ISSN
  • 0027-3171 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7906
OpenAlex
W1981131227
Cited by
366
References
14
FWCI
5.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Maximizing the Usefulness of Data Obtained with Planned Missing Value Patterns: An Application of Maximum Likelihood Procedures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327906mbr3102_3
The paper
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. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3102_3

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.