1
$\begingroup$

I have two regression models. I am using paneled data on individuals from 2010 up to 2019. For some individuals, I have several years of observations, whereas for others, there are only 2 or so. The thing is, I have created two different models: One including the control variables, and one without. Below, the first image shows the results without the control variables.

This is what the regression without the control variables looks likes

Then, I figured I would add the control variables. However, after doing so, I discovered that the number of observations in the regression models with the control variables is way lower... I am not sure if this is common, because for some individuals, there is no data on their personality traits (for example). I have tried to discover whether this is common in research, but I cannot really find anything about it... Could someone help me or give me advice? The number of observations still seems sufficient, but I'm not sure if this is even 'allowed' in statistics. This is what the regression with the control variables looks likes

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking. $\endgroup$
    – Community Bot
    Commented Apr 15, 2022 at 10:43

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Update: @FrankHarrell advises this situation requires multiple imputation. See hbiostat.org/rmsc/missing for how to do multiple imputation. The rest is my original answer.


Before getting to the question of missing covariate values, here are a few points to consider. Some of them might not be relevant in your area of study.

  • You have four regression models: a regression for graduate hourly earnings and for non-graduate hourly earnings, with and without covariates. Why do you model graduates and non-graduates separately? One model for hourly earnings doesn't necessarily mean that graduates and non-graduates share effects. (For example, we can add a graduate_status term to give each group its own intercept.) However, with two different models the two groups definitely share no effects.
  • You have multiple observations for most individuals, so how does your model handle that? It's incorrect to assume that observations for the same individual are independent. For example, it's reasonable to expect that the earnings of the same person in 2010 and 2011 are more similar than the earnings of two different persons in 2010. This can be represented with individual random effects.
  • You model the time effect with one dummy variable per year even though clearly the time effect increases with time (at least in the regressions without covariates). Have you considered modeling the functional relationship between time and hourly earnings, eg. as a line? See plot below.
  • Some of the covariates likely vary with time, eg., number of family members and number of children in the household. For many people these numbers would have changed over the course of 10 years. Have you thought about when these numbers are recorded and how you interpret their effects?
  • Time (as either categorical or continuous variable) might be confounding two effects: with each year, people gain more experience and they start getting paid more. Concurrently, average salaries might be increasing with inflation and cost of living. Maybe you already take this into account with Experience?

As you note yourself, you don't have data on at least one covariate for 83% of graduates (observations drop from 7476 to 1269) and 82% of non-graduates (10940 → 1948). There are methods to deal with missing values; otherwise the regression is fitted on the subset of observations without missing values.

Yes, this is allowed but as it's often the case in statistics, it means making (strong) assumptions. In this case the required assumption is that the patterns of missingness are not associated with the outcome, hourly earnings: either values are missing completely at random (think about flipping a coin that determine whether a value is observed or not) or values are missing at random (the other observed variables explain the missingness).

So broadly you have (at least) three options:

  1. Proceed with regression without covariates. However, you cannot unsee that covariates seem to be associated with the outcome. So it might be hard to justify the conclusions you draw from this analysis. [Regression analysis assumes validity, ie. the model includes all relevant predictors and the sample is representative of the population of interest.]
  2. Make strong assumptions about missingness and proceed with regression with covariates. You can also use your domain knowledge to decide that it's reasonable to ignore some covariates altogether.
  3. Impute missing values.

Finally, I'd like to show what I mean by functional relationship between time and outcome. Since I don't have the raw data, I plot estimated yearly effects from the regressions without covariates. You can see that the relationship seems to be linear with a different intercept. A straight line is the simplest function; it's possible to allow for a smooth relationship as well.

grad-vs-no-grad-by-year

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you so so much for these comments. I must say, I am slightly confused about everything (in case you didn't notice) and your comment is very helpful. It's true that I have a separate regression model for graduates and non-graduates. I'm basing my analysis on a paper who split it between malegrad/malenongrad/femalegrad/femalenongrad. By creating a distinct model for grads and non-grads, I thought the effect of potential work experience would be clear splitted (this effect may be different across the two groups). I thought that by creating this subset, the different effects may be clear $\endgroup$
    – notest
    Commented Apr 15, 2022 at 12:57
  • $\begingroup$ About the second point: My supervisor said I should do a pooled OLS regression with fixed time effects (time dummies). But now that I think about it, I'm confused about whether I should also include individual fixed effects... $\endgroup$
    – notest
    Commented Apr 15, 2022 at 13:00
  • $\begingroup$ Third point: Im afraid I dont really get what you mean by 'modeling the functional relationship between time and hourly earnings'. As compared to 2010, it is clear that in general the hourly earnings have increased (regardless of whether this is due to inflation etc.), so there are time effects present, but to be completely honest, I have no clue what to do with it other than mentioning that they are present... $\endgroup$
    – notest
    Commented Apr 15, 2022 at 13:02
  • $\begingroup$ Fouth point: I've not looked into that at all! Thank you so much, definitely gonna look into it $\endgroup$
    – notest
    Commented Apr 15, 2022 at 13:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Multiple imputation is needed here, besides addressing all of the super important design questions above. For one source on multiple imputation see hbiostat.org/rmsc/missing $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 13 at 14:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.