IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uerssr/321249.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Simulation Study to Compare Procedures Which Impute for Missing Items on an ESS Hog Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Ford, Barry L.
  • Kleweno, Douglas G.
  • Tortora, Robert D.

Abstract

This simulation study compares the effects of six procedures which impute values for missing items. An ESS list survey to estimate hog variables is used in this study. Specifically, the effects of the procedures on two survey variables--first quarter expected farrowings and second quarter expected farrowings--are analyzed under a range of conditions. These conditions include the percentage of missing items and the designation of which values are missing. Analysis of the mean square errors, the effects on the correlations. and the cost show that two versions of a ratio give the test results for very large sample sizes.

Suggested Citation

  • Ford, Barry L. & Kleweno, Douglas G. & Tortora, Robert D., 1980. "A Simulation Study to Compare Procedures Which Impute for Missing Items on an ESS Hog Survey," Staff Reports 321249, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:uerssr:321249
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.321249
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/321249/files/AGESS801222.1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.321249?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:uerssr:321249. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ersgvus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.