Hi Stephen
I know this problem well, and am familiar with the ways of correcting for non ignorable non responses, but the inevitable question that comes to mind is why would you wish to? Surely if you’ve offered PNTA as a choice, then it too is a result. Personally, I don’t think it's possible to reverse engineer the scientific method to let results compensate for experimental design without introducing conditions and assumptions which, in many respects, undermine the purity of the data: otherwise you’re results are based partly on measurement and partly on speculation.
I take your point that removing PNTAs might introduce bias, but unless you have a crystal ball then you’ll never know whether this is accurate or misleading. I’m sure there’s existing research which shows how gender, age, race, sexuality, ethnicity, location plays a role in PNTA, but how to move from the general to the specific of the survey you’ve just run might be a problem.
I tend to be a PNTA sort of person if the survey starts to feel a bit intrusive, or looks like it has an agenda that makes me feel uneasy (and always assume that in doing so I’m ruling myself out of the prize draw at the end :) Could you re-run the survey without PNTA as option, or perhaps preface it with a statement about how ticking the PNTA box might lead to skewed results. I’m sure this never crosses peoples’ minds when they choose this as an option?
Best, Tom
The Courtauld Institute of Art, Somerset House, Strand, London, WC2R 0RN
www.courtauld.ac.uk
Now Open at The Courtauld Gallery – Georgiana Houghton: Spirit Drawings
Until 11 September 2016
> On 22 Jul 2016, at 10:03, Mia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I really appreciate your attention to these questions, but personally it's way beyond the realms of my knowledge! Are there others on the list who could suggest R or Python libraries?
>
> Failing that, the Association of Internet Researchers list at [log in to unmask] might have some suggestions.
>
> Cheers, Mia
>
> Sent from my handheld computing device
>
>> On 22 Jul 2016, at 08:28, Stephen McConnachie <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I have a statistical methodology question - what could be more exciting for a damp warm Friday? I realise it's not entirely in the comfort zone of this group, but I thought I'd try before exploring it with statistician contacts and broader research online.
>>
>> It's about managing missing data in survey response, where the missing data is Missing Not At Random (MNAR) aka nonignorable nonresponse. I'm interested in any established models to correct for bias. Maybe those of you who have conducted surveys have come across this and found a good, understandable solution?
>>
>> I'll explain the problem. Imagine you're conducting a survey where some of the questions are within the 'sensitive data' realm: race, gender, sexuality, disability. Imagine you're getting high 'prefer not to answer' levels , eg 50%. One flawed approach is listwise deletion, meaning that the 50% PNTA is simply excluded from analysis. This introduces a bias risk, because it's unlikely that the nonresponse is random, it's more likely to be meaningful - eg you might argue that over-represented cases - white, heterosexual males without disability - are slightly more likely to PNTA than under-represented cases. So deleting the PNTA is likely to introduce bias in your analysis, even if that nonrandomness is low level. A concrete example: removing 50% PNTA from the gender question might bias your analysis towards misleadingly high % female.
>>
>> There are complex statistical methodologies for approaching the management of this problem - multiple imputation, maximum likelihood estimation, etc - but the complexity is daunting to a non-statistician without a software package like Stata. So I wonder if any of you have done this and either found a simple solution or developed a complex solution which is transferable - in other words, does anyone have some Python they can give me / direct me to??
>>
>> All the best,
>> Stephen
>>
>> ****************************************************************
>> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>> ****************************************************************
>
> ****************************************************************
> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> ****************************************************************
>
The Courtauld Institute of Art is a company limited by guarantee (registered in England and Wales, number 04464432) and an exempt charity. SCT Enterprises Limited is a limited company (registered in England and Wales, number 3137515). Their registered offices are at Somerset House, Strand, London WC2R 0RN. The sale of items related to The Courtauld Gallery and its collections is managed by SCT Enterprises Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Courtauld Institute of Art.
****************************************************************
website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
[un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
****************************************************************
|