Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

The use and misuse of structural equation modeling in management research A review and critique

The use and misuse of structural equation modeling in management research A review and critique Purpose – The research practice in management research is dominantly based on structural equation modeling (SEM), but almost exclusively, and often misguidedly, on covariance‐based SEM. The purpose of this paper is to question the current research myopia in management research, because the paper adumbrates theoretical foundations and guidance for the two SEM streams: covariance‐based and variance‐based SEM; and improves the conceptual knowledge by comparing the most important procedures and elements in the SEM study, using different theoretical criteria. Design/methodology/approach – The study thoroughly analyzes, reviews and presents two streams using common methodological background. The conceptual framework discusses the two streams by analysis of theory, measurement model specification, sample and goodness‐of‐fit. Findings – The paper identifies and discusses the use and misuse of covariance‐based and variance‐based SEM utilizing common topics such as: first, theory (theory background, relation to theory and research orientation); second, measurement model specification (type of latent construct, type of study, reliability measures, etc.); third, sample (sample size and data distribution assumption); and fourth, goodness‐of‐fit (measurement of the model fit and residual co/variance). Originality/value – The paper questions the usefulness of Cronbach's α research paradigm and discusses alternatives that are well established in social science, but not well known in the management research community. The author presents short research illustration in which analyzes the four recently published papers using common methodological background. The paper concludes with discussion of some open questions in management research practice that remain under‐investigated and unutilized. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Advances in Management Research Emerald Publishing

The use and misuse of structural equation modeling in management research A review and critique

Journal of Advances in Management Research , Volume 11 (1): 35 – Apr 29, 2014

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/the-use-and-misuse-of-structural-equation-modeling-in-management-Fk0my7MP0A
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0972-7981
DOI
10.1108/JAMR-07-2013-0043
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – The research practice in management research is dominantly based on structural equation modeling (SEM), but almost exclusively, and often misguidedly, on covariance‐based SEM. The purpose of this paper is to question the current research myopia in management research, because the paper adumbrates theoretical foundations and guidance for the two SEM streams: covariance‐based and variance‐based SEM; and improves the conceptual knowledge by comparing the most important procedures and elements in the SEM study, using different theoretical criteria. Design/methodology/approach – The study thoroughly analyzes, reviews and presents two streams using common methodological background. The conceptual framework discusses the two streams by analysis of theory, measurement model specification, sample and goodness‐of‐fit. Findings – The paper identifies and discusses the use and misuse of covariance‐based and variance‐based SEM utilizing common topics such as: first, theory (theory background, relation to theory and research orientation); second, measurement model specification (type of latent construct, type of study, reliability measures, etc.); third, sample (sample size and data distribution assumption); and fourth, goodness‐of‐fit (measurement of the model fit and residual co/variance). Originality/value – The paper questions the usefulness of Cronbach's α research paradigm and discusses alternatives that are well established in social science, but not well known in the management research community. The author presents short research illustration in which analyzes the four recently published papers using common methodological background. The paper concludes with discussion of some open questions in management research practice that remain under‐investigated and unutilized.

Journal

Journal of Advances in Management ResearchEmerald Publishing

Published: Apr 29, 2014

Keywords: Structural equation modeling; Modeling

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$499/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month