Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-z2ts4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-10T00:14:39.517Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

How Multiple Imputation Makes a Difference

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2017

Ranjit Lall*
Affiliation:
Department of Government, Harvard University, 1737 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, MA 02138
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Political scientists increasingly recognize that multiple imputation represents a superior strategy for analyzing missing data to the widely used method of listwise deletion. However, there has been little systematic investigation of how multiple imputation affects existing empirical knowledge in the discipline. This article presents the first large-scale examination of the empirical effects of substituting multiple imputation for listwise deletion in political science. The examination focuses on research in the major subfield of comparative and international political economy (CIPE) as an illustrative example. Specifically, I use multiple imputation to reanalyze the results of almost every quantitative CIPE study published during a recent five-year period in International Organization and World Politics, two of the leading subfield journals in CIPE. The outcome is striking: in almost half of the studies, key results “disappear” (by conventional statistical standards) when reanalyzed.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology 
Supplementary material: PDF

Lall Supplementary Material

Appendix

Download Lall Supplementary Material(PDF)
PDF 187.5 KB