Not All Missing Data are Equal: Choosing the Right Imputation Method for Binary Datasets

Abstract

Missing binary predictors are common in reliability, quality control, and industrial decision systems, yet imputation methods are often chosen by convenience rather than evidence. We conduct a Monte Carlo study comparing mode substitution, sequential hot‐deck, missForest, MICE, and KNN with three neighbourhood sizes under MCAR, MAR, and MNAR missingness, across missingness rates from 5% to 50% and two predictor‐dependence structures. Performance is evaluated on three targets: exact recovery of missing binary cells, recovery of logistic‐regression coefficients, and downstream classification using logistic regression, naive Bayes, support vector machines, and random forests. The results reveal a clear trade‐off. KNN is strongest for exact cell recovery under MCAR and MAR, whereas missForest performs best under MNAR. MICE is the most reliable choice for downstream predictive performance across learners and missingness mechanisms. By contrast, mode imputation and sequential hot‐deck achieve the best coefficient recovery. The main implication is operational: in binary‐data environments, imputation should be chosen to match the analytical objective–reconstruction, inference, or prediction–because no single method dominates all targets simultaneously.