I guess that you shouldn't represent it in -ice-
at all. Imputing the components is one thing. Producing
a construct downstream of the imputation is another.
Otherwise, at best, it is hard to disentangle what
to blame for what.
In any case, what is your formula here? Dying to know,
Nick
[email protected]
[email protected]
> I'm trying to undertake multiple imputation with "ice" and have a
> questions about how to account for the relationship between a
> constructed variable and its multiple component parts. I'm aware
> that I should use "passive" and, at times, "eq", but not exactly
> sure of how. For example, I have created a variable I'll call
> "sexuality" from the "gender" variable (0,1) and "attracted to
> males" (0,1) and "attracted to females" (0,1). How would I
> represent this in "ice"? I'd appreciate some help figuring this
> out.
> Thanks
> S. Strauss
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
