Suchergebnisse
Filter
5 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
SSRN
Working paper
A clarification of confirmatory composite analysis (CCA)
In: International journal of information management, Band 61, S. 102399
ISSN: 0268-4012
A test for multigroup comparison using partial least squares path modeling
Klesel, M., Schuberth, F., Henseler, J., & Niehaves, B. (2019). A test for multigroup comparison using partial least squares path modeling. Internet Research, 29(3), 464-477. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-11-2017-0418 ; Purpose: People seem to function according to different models, which implies that in business and social sciences, heterogeneity is a rule rather than an exception. Researchers can investigate such heterogeneity through multigroup analysis (MGA). In the context of partial least squares path modeling (PLS-PM), MGA is currently applied to perform multiple comparisons of parameters across groups. However, this approach has significant drawbacks: first, the whole model is not considered when comparing groups, and second, the family-wise error rate is higher than the predefined significance level when the groups are indeed homogenous, leading to incorrect conclusions. Against this background, the purpose of this paper is to present and validate new MGA tests, which are applicable in the context of PLS-PM, and to compare their efficacy to existing approaches. Design/methodology/approach: The authors propose two tests that adopt the squared Euclidean distance and the geodesic distance to compare the model-implied indicator correlation matrix across groups. The authors employ permutation to obtain the corresponding reference distribution to draw statistical inference about group differences. A Monte Carlo simulation provides insights into the sensitivity and specificity of both permutation tests and their performance, in comparison to existing approaches. Findings: Both proposed tests provide a considerable degree of statistical power. However, the test based on the geodesic distance outperforms the test based on the squared Euclidean distance in this regard. Moreover, both proposed tests lead to rejection rates close to the predefined significance level in the case of no group differences. Hence, our proposed tests are more reliable than an uncontrolled repeated comparison approach. Research limitations/implications: Current guidelines on MGA in the context of PLS-PM should be extended by applying the proposed tests in an early phase of the analysis. Beyond our initial insights, more research is required to assess the performance of the proposed tests in different situations. Originality/value: This paper contributes to the existing PLS-PM literature by proposing two new tests to assess multigroup differences. For the first time, this allows researchers to statistically compare a whole model across groups by applying a single statistical test. ; publishersversion ; published
BASE
Robust partial least squares path modeling
In: Behaviormetrika, Band 47, Heft 1, S. 307-334
ISSN: 1349-6964
AbstractOutliers can seriously distort the results of statistical analyses and thus threaten the validity of structural equation models. As a remedy, this article introduces a robust variant of Partial Least Squares Path Modeling (PLS) and consistent Partial Least Squares (PLSc) called robust PLS and robust PLSc, respectively, which are robust against distortion caused by outliers. Consequently, robust PLS/PLSc allows to estimate structural models containing constructs modeled as composites and common factors even if empirical data are contaminated by outliers. A Monte Carlo simulation with various population models, sample sizes, and extents of outliers shows that robust PLS/PLSc can deal with outlier shares of up to$$50\%$$50%without distorting the estimates. The simulation also shows that robust PLS/PLSc should always be preferred over its traditional counterparts if the data contain outliers. To demonstrate the relevance for empirical research, robust PLSc is applied to two empirical examples drawn from the extant literature.
Structural Parameters under Partial Least Squares and Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modeling: A Comment on Yuan and Deng (2021)
In: Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, Band 30, Heft 3, S. 339-345
ISSN: 1532-8007