Dear Colleagues,
 
I have had the most unfortunate experience with my DClinPsy Research. I was conducting a simple online questionnaire project with adolescents. However due to lack of access to computers a number of schools opted to print the questionnaires. Unfortunately something to do with the formatting from Bristol Survey resulted in the last question Q26 of the Self-Compassion Measure (attached) not being printed.
 
I now have 392 questionnaires returned missing this item which is a central tenant of one of the subscales. Due to the anonymous nature of the data I cannot match participants if I desired to seek this response. I would really appreciate any advice people have on how best to manage this missing data issue?
Possible options
 
I do just now have the slight option of time and I could recollect next year, however this is a large amount of data and I am uncomfortable not using it if there is a viable way.
 
Any advice would be greatly appreciated
 
Ciara
 

Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 08:43:18 -0700
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: To report or not to report...
To: [log in to unmask]


I wouldn't bother to report things like the K-S test. (I never do a K-S test.)  

I might report skew and kurtosis, and might say "three outliers were removed".

In a journal article you're usually short on space, so that kind of thing gets cut.

Jeremy




On 20 May 2014 03:04, ben taylor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hi,

 

I was wondering whether you would usually report the preliminary data screening concerning the testing for outliers and assumptions regarding normality (e.g. Skewness and Kurtosis or Kolmogorov-Smirnov) in a paper for a peer reviewed journal.


I was recommended to include this in my dissertation and I also believe it is good practice to do so but usually I never see it reported in peer reviewed articles so I was wondering what you think about this.


Best,


Ben