Search results

In their paper titled “A Miracle of Measurement or Accidental Constructivism? How PLS Subverts the Realist Search for Truth,” Cadogan and Lee (2022) cast serious doubt on PLS’s suitability for scientific studies. The purpose of this commentary is to discuss the claims of Cadogan and Lee, correct some inaccuracies, and derive recommendations for researchers using structural equation models.

This paper uses scenario analysis to show which estimators are appropriate for reflective measurement models and composite models, and formulates the statistical model that underlies PLS Mode A. It also contrasts two different perspectives: PLS as an estimator for structural equation models vs. PLS-SEM as an overarching framework with a sui generis logic.

There are different variants of PLS, which include PLS, consistent PLS, PLSe1, PLSe2, proposed ordinal PLS and robust PLS, each of which serves a particular purpose. All of these are appropriate for scientific inquiry if applied properly. It is not PLS that subverts the realist search for truth, but some proponents of a framework called “PLS-SEM.” These proponents redefine the term “reflective measurement,” argue against the assessment of model fit and suggest that researchers could obtain “confirmation” for their model.

Researchers should be more conscious, open and respectful regarding different research paradigms.

Researchers should select a statistical model that adequately represents their theory, not necessarily a common factor model, and formulate their model explicitly. Particularly for instrumentalists, pragmatists and constructivists, the composite model appears promising. Researchers should be concerned about their estimator’s properties, not about whether it is called “PLS.” Further, researchers should critically evaluate their model, not seek confirmation or blindly believe in its value.

This paper critically appraises Cadogan and Lee (2022) and reminds researchers who wish to use structural equation modeling, particularly PLS, for their statistical analysis, of some important scientific principles.

This paper covers the development of a multidimensional contract administration performance model (CAPM) for construction projects. The proposed CAPM is intended to be used by the industry stakeholders to measure the construction contract administration (CCA) performance and identify the strengths and weaknesses of the CCA system for running or completed projects.

The research design follows a sequential mixed methodology of qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. In the first phase, contract administration indicators were collected from relevant literature. In the second phase, an online questionnaire was prepared, and data were collected and analyzed using the crisp value of fuzzy membership function, and structural equation modeling (SEM). The fuzzy set was chosen for this study due to the presence of uncertainty and fuzziness associated with the importance of several key indicators affecting the CCA performance. Finally, SEM was used to test and analyze interrelationships among constructs of CCA performance.

The data collected from 336 construction professionals worldwide through an online survey was utilized to develop the fuzzy structural equation model. The goodness-of-fit and reliability tests validated the model. The study concluded a significant correlation between CCA performance, CCA operational indicators, and the process groups.

The contribution of this paper to the existing knowledge is the development of a fuzzy structural equation model that serves as a measurement tool for the contract administration performance. This is the first quantitative structural equation model to capture contract administration performance. The model consists of 93 Construction Contract Administration(CCA) performance indicators categorized into 11 project management process groups namely: project governance and start-up; team management; communication and relationship management; quality and acceptance management; performance monitoring and reporting management; document and record management; financial management; changes and control management; claims and dispute resolution management; contract risk management and contract closeout management.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the appropriateness of equal weights estimation (sumscores) and the application of the composite equivalence index (CEI) vis-à-vis differentiated indicator weights produced by partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM).

The authors rely on prior literature as well as empirical illustrations and a simulation study to assess the efficacy of equal weights estimation and the CEI.

The results show that the CEI lacks discriminatory power, and its use can lead to major differences in structural model estimates, conceals measurement model issues and almost always leads to inferior out-of-sample predictive accuracy compared to differentiated weights produced by PLS-SEM.

In light of its manifold conceptual and empirical limitations, the authors advise against the use of the CEI. Its adoption and the routine use of equal weights estimation could adversely affect the validity of measurement and structural model results and understate structural model predictive accuracy. Although this study shows that the CEI is an unsuitable metric to decide between equal weights and differentiated weights, it does not propose another means for such a comparison.

The results suggest that researchers and practitioners should prefer differentiated indicator weights such as those produced by PLS-SEM over equal weights.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to provide a comprehensive assessment of the CEI’s usefulness. The results provide guidance for researchers considering using equal indicator weights instead of PLS-SEM-based weighted indicators.

Structural equation modeling (SEM) has been widely used to examine complex research models in international business and marketing research. While the covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) approach is dominant, the authors argue that the field’s dynamic nature and the sometimes early stage of theory development more often require a partial least squares SEM (PLS-SEM) approach. The purpose of this paper is to critically review the application of SEM techniques in the field.

The authors searched six journals with an international business (and marketing) focus (Management International Review, Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of International Management, International Marketing Review, Journal of World Business, International Business Review) from 1990 to 2013. The authors reviewed all articles that apply SEM, analyzed their research objectives and methodology choices, and assessed whether the PLS-SEM papers followed the best practices outlined in the past.

Of the articles, 379 utilized CB-SEM and 45 PLS-SEM. The reasons for using PLS-SEM referred largely to sampling and data measurement issues and did not sufficiently build on the procedure’s benefits that stem from its design for predictive and exploratory purposes. Thus, the procedure’s key benefits, which might be fruitful for the theorizing process, are not being fully exploited. Furthermore, authors need to better follow best practices to truly advance theory building.

The authors examined a subset of journals in the field and did not include general management journals that publish international business and marketing-related studies. Fur-thermore, the authors found only limited use of PLS-SEM in the journals the authors considered relevant to the study.

The study contributes to the literature by providing researchers seeking to adopt SEM as an analytical method with practical guidelines for making better choices concerning an appropriate SEM approach. Furthermore, based on a systematic review of current practices in the international business and marketing literature, the authors identify critical challenges in the selection and use of SEM procedures and offer concrete recommendations for better practice.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze patterns and trends of articles that present the use of structural equation modeling (SEM) and that were published in several Brazilian journals. In addition, this paper maps the institutions where the authors of the identified articles are affiliated, and discusses aspects of searching the articles in journals’ archives and other scientific databases.

The work used bibliometrics, which is one of the forms of evaluation and measurement of information flows in scientific knowledge, using mathematical and statistical methods.

The study showed an exponential growth in using SEM in several areas in recent years, with predominance in marketing. Most of the publications were produced by authors from institutions such as USP, FGV and UFRGS, but most authors published only one article using SEM. Almost all published articles used one of the three most common software, especially AMOS®. Surprisingly, many articles did not mention the software used, indicating methodological flaw.

Weaknesses were found regarding the search for articles in the different sources used, indicating that, for literature reviews, the research should be conducted in several databases in a complementary way and not alternatively. This fact becomes critical especially when expressions in languages other than Portuguese were used. This situation suggests an aggravating lack of visibility for the Brazilian scientific community since the articles are less likely to be found.

The paper shows that among the various techniques of multivariate data analysis used in the field of administration, SEM has gained prominence being operationalized using specific software.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a structural relationship model to study the relationship between causes and effects of poor communication and information exchange in construction projects using Smart-PLS.

The first method of this research is to identify the causes and effects factors of poor communication in construction projects from the extant of literature. The data used to develop the model was collected using a questionnaire survey, which targeted construction practitioners in the Malaysian construction industry. A five-point Likert type scale was used to rate the significance of the factors. The factors were classified under their relevant construct/group using exploratory factor analysis. A hypothetical model was developed and then transformed into Smart-PLS in which the hypothetical model suggested that each group of the cause factors has a direct impact on the effect groups. The hypothesis was tested using t-values and p-values. The model was assessed for its inner and outer components and achieved the threshold criterion. Further, the model was verified by engaging 14 construction experts to verify its applicability in the construction project setting.

The study developed a structural equation model to clarify the relationships between causes and effects of poor communication in construction projects. The model explained the degree of relationships among causes and effects of poor communication in construction projects.

The published academic and non-academic literature introduced many studies on the issue of communication including the definitions, importance, barriers to effective communication and means of poor communication. However, these studies ended up only on the general issue of communication lacking an in-depth investigation of the causes and effects of poor communication in the construction industry. The study implemented advanced structural modeling to study the causes and effects. The questionnaire, the data and concluding results fill the identified research gap of this study. The addressed issue is also of interest because communication is considered one of the main knowledge areas in construction management.

This study aims to examine the role of an overall model fit assessment in the context of partial least squares path modeling (PLS-PM). In doing so, it will explain when it is important to assess the overall model fit and provides ways of assessing the fit of composite models. Moreover, it will resolve major concerns about model fit assessment that have been raised in the literature on PLS-PM.

This paper explains when and how to assess the fit of PLS path models. Furthermore, it discusses the concerns raised in the PLS-PM literature about the overall model fit assessment and provides concise guidelines on assessing the overall fit of composite models.

This study explains that the model fit assessment is as important for composite models as it is for common factor models. To assess the overall fit of composite models, researchers can use a statistical test and several fit indices known through structural equation modeling (SEM) with latent variables.

Researchers who use PLS-PM to assess composite models that aim to understand the mechanism of an underlying population and draw statistical inferences should take the concept of the overall model fit seriously.

To facilitate the overall fit assessment of composite models, this study presents a two-step procedure adopted from the literature on SEM with latent variables.

This paper clarifies that the necessity to assess model fit is not a question of which estimator will be used (PLS-PM, maximum likelihood, etc). but of the purpose of statistical modeling. Whereas, the model fit assessment is paramount in explanatory modeling, it is not imperative in predictive modeling.

Partial least squares (PLS) path modeling is a variance-based structural equation modeling (SEM) technique that is widely applied in business and social sciences. Its ability to model composites and factors makes it a formidable statistical tool for new technology research. Recent reviews, discussions, and developments have led to substantial changes in the understanding and use of PLS. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper aggregates new insights and offers a fresh look at PLS path modeling. It presents new developments, such as consistent PLS, confirmatory composite analysis, and the heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations.

PLS path modeling is the method of choice if a SEM contains both factors and composites. Novel tests of exact fit make a confirmatory use of PLS path modeling possible.

This paper provides updated guidelines of how to use PLS and how to report and interpret its results.

After expressing an initial disquiet about the nature of many studies that are published using structural equation modelling (SEM), a rationale for using the technique is provided. Given the advantages provided by the technique, the differences between covariance-based and partial least squares techniques are briefly described. The argument progresses by indicating assumptions behind the techniques and what it is that referees require before being able to properly referee the paper. Some issues are fundamental to survey-based materials and include the requirement to distinguish between importance and discriminatory power, and the over-dependency on cross-sectional analysis when making claims of generalisation. Other issues of scale creation and sample size are touched upon. This paper finishes by suggesting a checklist for referees who are asked to review papers using SEM.