Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
| From | Maarten Buis <maartenlbuis@gmail.com> |
| To | statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |
| Subject | Re: st: changing the order of the imputations while using ICE |
| Date | Thu, 1 Dec 2011 17:26:32 +0100 |
Causality does not matter for imputation. All it is supposed to do is extrapolate patterns of association on to the missing values, nothing more. So there is no need to change the order in which the imputation takes place. -- Maarten On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Francesco D'Amico <francdamico@yahoo.it> wrote: > > Dear all > > I'm running a multiple imputation through the use of ICE (I'm using Stata 11). The default option is that the variables with fewest missing are imputed first, followed by the variables with more and more missing values, till the end of the imputation process. > > I wondered whether there is a way to impose a preferred order in the imputation process, in order to create a particular sequentiality that represents our chosen pattern of causality/dependence. I tried setting appropriately the eq() option but it did not seem to help in terms of ordering the equations. > > Thanks a lot for any hint you can provide me > > > Francesco > > * > * 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/ -- -------------------------- Maarten L. Buis Institut fuer Soziologie Universitaet Tuebingen Wilhelmstrasse 36 72074 Tuebingen Germany http://www.maartenbuis.nl -------------------------- * * 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/