On the Emancipation of PLS-SEM: A Commentary on Rigdon (2012)

Rigdon's (2012) thoughtful article argues that PLS-SEM should free itself from CB-SEM. It should renounce all mechanisms, frameworks, and jargon associated with factor models entirely. In this comment, we shed further light on two subject areas on which Rigdon (2012) touches in his discussion of CB-SEM and PLS-SEM. Rigdon (2012) highlights ways to make better use of PLS-SEM's predictive capabilities, for example, by reverting to set correlations. We discuss this issue in more detail, highlighting the need to examine the predictive capabilities of models when developing and testing theories, and broach the issue of confirmatory versus exploratory modeling. As a result of our discussion, we call for the continuous improvement of the PLS-SEM method to uncover its capabilities for theory testing while retaining its predictive characte

Segmentation of PLS-Path Models by Iterative Reweighted Regressions

Uncovering unobserved heterogeneity is a requirement to obtain valid results when using the structural equation modeling (SEM) method with empirical data. Conventional segmentation methods usually fail in SEM since they account for the observations but not the latent variables and their relationships in the structural model. This research introduces a new segmentation approach to variance-based SEM. The iterative reweighted regressions segmentation method for PLS (PLS-IRRS) effectively identifies segments in data sets. In comparison with existing alternatives, PLS-IRRS is multiple times faster while delivering the same quality of results. We believe that PLS-IRRS has the potential to become one of the primary choices to address the critical issue of unobserved heterogeneity in PLS-SE

Structural equation models: From paths to networks (Westland 2019)

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a statistical analytic framework that allows researchers to specify and test models with observed and latent (or unobservable) variables and their generally linear relationships. In the past decades, SEM has become a standard statistical analysis technique in behavioral, educational, psychological, and social science researchers’ repertoire. From a technical perspective, SEM was developed as a mixture of two statistical fields—path analysis and data reduction. Path analysis is used to specify and examine directional relationships between observed variables, whereas data reduction is applied to uncover (unobserved) low-dimensional representations of observed variables, which are referred to as latent variables. Since two different data reduction techniques (i.e., factor analysis and principal component analysis) were available to the statistical community, SEM also evolved into two domains—factor-based and component-based (e.g., Jöreskog and Wold 1982). In factor-based SEM, in which the psychometric or psychological measurement tradition has strongly influenced, a (common) factor represents a latent variable under the assumption that each latent variable exists as an entity independent of observed variables, but also serves as the sole source of the associations between the observed variables. Conversely, in component-based SEM, which is more in line with traditional multivariate statistics, a weighted composite or a component of observed variables represents a latent variable under the assumption that the latter is an aggregation (or a direct consequence) of observed variables

Guidelines for choosing between multi-item and single-item scales for construct measurement: A predictive validity perspective

Establishing predictive validity of measures is a major concern in marketing research. This paper investigates the conditions favoring the use of single items versus multi-item scales in ter

How to specify, estimate, and validate higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM

Higher-order constructs, which facilitate modeling a construct on a more abstract higher-level dimension and its more concrete lower-order subdimensions, have become an increasingly visible trend in applications of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Unfortunately, researchers frequently confuse the specification, estimation, and validation of higher-order constructs, for example, when it comes to assessing their reliability and validity. Addressing this concern, this paper explains how to evaluate the results of higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM using the repeated indicators and the two-stage approaches, which feature prominently in applied social sciences research. Focusing on the reflective-reflective and reflective-formative types of higher-order constructs, we use the well-known corporate reputation model example to illustrate their specification, estimation, and validation. Thereby, we provide the guidance that scholars, marketing researchers, and practitioners need when using higher-order constructs in their studies

Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R

Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) has become a standard approach for analyzing complex inter-relationships between observed and latent variables. Researchers appreciate the many advantages of PLS-SEM such as the possibility to estimate very complex models and the method’s flexibility in terms of data requirements and measurement specification. This practical open access guide provides a step-by-step treatment of the major choices in analyzing PLS path models using R, a free software environment for statistical computing, which runs on Windows, macOS, and UNIX computer platforms. Adopting the R software’s SEMinR package, which brings a friendly syntax to creating and estimating structural equation models, each chapter offers a concise overview of relevant topics and metrics, followed by an in-depth description of a case study. Simple instructions give readers the “how-tos” of using SEMinR to obtain solutions and document their results. Rules of thumb in every chapter provide guidance on best practices in the application and interpretation of PLS-SEM

Data generation for composite-based structural equation modeling methods

Examining the efficacy of composite-based structural equation modeling (SEM) features prominently in research. However, studies analyzing the efficacy of corresponding estimators usually rely on factor model data. Thereby, they assess and analyze their performance on erroneous grounds (i.e., factor model data instead of composite model data). A potential reason for this malpractice lies in the lack of available composite model-based data generation procedures for prespecified model parameters in the structural model and the measurements models. Addressing this gap in research, we derive model formulations and present a composite model-based data generation approach. The findings will assist researchers in their composite-based SEM simulation studies

Prediction: coveted, yet forsaken? Introducing a cross-validated predictive ability test in partial least squares path modeling

Management researchers often develop theories and policies that are forward‐looking. The prospective outlook of predictive modeling, where a model predicts unseen or new data, can complement the retrospective nature of causal‐explanatory modeling that dominates the field. Partial least squares (PLS) path modeling is an excellent tool for building theories that offer both explanation and prediction. A limitation of PLS, however, is the lack of a statistical test to assess whether a proposed or alternative theoretical model offers significantly better out‐of‐sample predictive power than a benchmark or an established model. Such an assessment of predictive power is essential for theory development and validation, and for selecting a model on which to base managerial and policy decisions. We introduce the cross‐validated predictive ability test (CVPAT) to conduct a pairwise comparison of predictive power of competing models, and substantiate its performance via multiple Monte Carlo studies. We propose a stepwise predictive model comparison procedure to guide researchers, and demonstrate CVPAT's practical utility using the well‐known American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) model