PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 8, 2026Psychological Methods0 citations

Planned missingness to reduce survey length: A sheep in wolf’s clothing.

View Full Paper
CZCharlene ZhangPSPaul R. SackettSDSaron Demeke

Key Points

  • This research investigates how planned missingness can reduce survey length while maintaining data quality compared to short forms.
  • Conducted a Monte Carlo simulation
  • Compared planned missingness design to standard short form measures
  • Manipulated study characteristics like constructs and sample size
  • Assessed the impact of empirical vs. non-empirical short forms
  • Both planned missingness and short forms produce comparable results across varied conditions
  • Short forms yield slightly more accurate estimates when empirically developed
  • Planned missingness provides slightly better accuracy when short forms are not entirely empirical
  • Overall discrepancies between the two methods were minor

Abstract

Psychologists often have the need to reduce the length of a survey study to ensure data quality, meet practical constraints, or conserve participant resources. The present study explores a survey technique called planned missingness (PM) as an approach to reducing study length. We conducted a Monte Carlo simulation that directly compared using a PM design to the standard practice of using short forms of measures on their ability to reproduce true population intercorrelations. We manipulated a number of population and study characteristics, including the number of constructs, missingness level, sample size, true intercorrelations, as well as the manner in which short forms are developed, and their impact on the short form-planned missingness comparison. Results show that the two approaches perform comparably across a large number of conditions. Under simulated, idealized data conditions and using correctly specified models, short forms produce slightly more accurate estimates when empirically developed short forms are readily available for use. PM produces slightly more accurate estimates when short forms are developed not entirely empirically. However, discrepancies are small in general. Additional advantages and limitations of PM are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zhang et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698828cb0fc35cd7a88489c1https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000793
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The Efficiency of Missing at Random Planned Missing Designs2026
  2. 2Omissions by Design in a Survey: Is This a Good Choice when using Structural Equation Models?2024
  3. 3Missing data considerations for patient reported outcome measures in randomized controlled trials2026
  4. 4Multiple imputation of missing data in large studies with many variables: A fully conditional specification approach using partial least squares.2024 · 1 citations
  5. 5Imputing longitudinal PROM data at the item and score level in clinical trials2026