Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Sociological Methods & Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by FEUCHT, T. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Estimating Multiplicative Regression Terms in the Presence of Measurement Error

THOMAS E. FEUCHT

Cleveland State University

Measurement error is a continuing concern for sociologists. A particularly nagging problem has been estimating regression coefficients of multiplicative effects when the component variables contain measurement error. Recently, Heise (1986) presented a corrected estimator for multiplicative terms containing measurement error. The research presented here extends Heise's work, and examines the use of an alternate corrected/constrained estimator proposed by Fuller (1980, 1987). The results of a Monte Carlo simulating give some support for Heise's findings, while providing further explanation for the behavior of estimators. The simulation focuses on small samples (n = 60 and n = 90), and examines the impact of different levels of measurement reliability on error correction procedures. Estimators are compared on the basis of bias, variance, root mean squared error, and singlesample inference accuracy. OLS is included as a benchmark. Results indicated only modest improvements over OLS in estimation using the corrected/constrained estimator, and some hazards in using the simpler corrected estimator in small samples. OLS is judged to be fairly robust and predictable in its inaccuracy.

Sociological Methods & Research, Vol. 17, No. 3, 257-282 (1989)
DOI: 10.1177/0049124189017003002
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?