To read this content please select one of the options below:

A comparative study of the predictive power of component-based approaches to structural equation modeling

Gyeongcheol Cho (Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada)
Sunmee Kim (Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada)
Jonathan Lee (College of Business and Public Management, University of La Verne, La Verne, California, USA)
Heungsun Hwang (Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada)
Marko Sarstedt (Munich School of Management, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany and Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Babeș-Bolyai-Universität Cluj, Cluj, Romania)
Christian M. Ringle (Department of Management Sciences and Technology, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Hamburg, Germany)

European Journal of Marketing

ISSN: 0309-0566

Article publication date: 28 March 2022

Issue publication date: 30 May 2023

987

Abstract

Purpose

Generalized structured component analysis (GSCA) and partial least squares path modeling (PLSPM) are two key component-based approaches to structural equation modeling that facilitate the analysis of theoretically established models in terms of both explanation and prediction. This study aims to offer a comparative evaluation of GSCA and PLSPM in a predictive modeling framework.

Design/methodology/approach

A simulation study compares the predictive performance of GSCA and PLSPM under various simulation conditions and different prediction types of correctly specified and misspecified models.

Findings

The results suggest that GSCA with reflective composite indicators (GSCAR) is the most versatile approach. For observed prediction, which uses the component scores to generate prediction for the indicators, GSCAR performs slightly better than PLSPM with mode A. For operative prediction, which considers all parameter estimates to generate predictions, both methods perform equally well. GSCA with formative composite indicators and PLSPM with mode B generally lag behind the other methods.

Research limitations/implications

Future research may further assess the methods’ prediction precision, considering more experimental factors with a wider range of levels, including more extreme ones.

Practical implications

When prediction is the primary study aim, researchers should generally revert to GSCAR, considering its performance for observed and operative prediction together.

Originality/value

This research is the first to compare the relative efficacy of GSCA and PLSPM in terms of predictive power.

Keywords

Citation

Cho, G., Kim, S., Lee, J., Hwang, H., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2023), "A comparative study of the predictive power of component-based approaches to structural equation modeling", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57 No. 6, pp. 1641-1661. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-07-2020-0542

Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2022, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles