Ronald T. Cenfetelli
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Formative measurement is a valuable alternative to reflective measurement when developing indicators of latent variables in structural equation models (SEM). Our goal is to further guide IS research in the application of formative measures by comparing the two dominant analysis techniques: component-(e.g., partial least squares -PLS) and covariance-based SEM techniques. We demonstrate that covariance-based techniques can be appropriate for formative measurement despite a near absence of their use within IS research, which favors PLS. In addition, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using either technique and offer six prescriptions to consider when choosing one technique over another for formative measurement analysis. We present these and other contributions towards encouraging the continued and expanded use of formative measurement in IS research and the diversity of techniques to analyze formative measures.
- Aguirre-Urreta, M. I., and Marakas, G. M. (2012). "Revisiting Bias Due to Construct Misspecification: Different Results from Considering Coefficients in Standardized Form." MIS Quarterly. Vol. 36, No. 1: pp. 123--138. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Anderson, J. C., and Gerbing, D. W. (1988). "Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach." Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 103, No. 3: pp. 411--423.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Barki, H., Titah, R., and Boffo, C. (2007). "Information System Use-Related Activity: An Expanded Behavioral Conceptualization of Individual-Level Information System Use." Information Systems Research. Vol. 18, No. 2: pp. 173--192. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bollen, K., and Lennox, R. (1991). "Conventional Wisdom on Measurement -a Structural Equation Perspective." Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 110, No. 2: pp. 305--314.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables, Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
- Bollen, K. A., and Davis, W. R. (2009). "Causal Indicator Models: Identification, Estimation, and Testing." Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. Vol. 16, No. 3: pp. 498--522.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cadogan, J. W., and Lee, N. (2013). "Improper Use of Endogenous Formative Variables." Journal of Business Research. Vol. 66, No. pp. 233--241.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Carlo, J. L., Lyytinen, K., and Rose, G. M. (2012). "A Knowledge-Based Model of Radical Innovation in Small Software Firms." MIS Quarterly. Vol. 36, No. 3: pp. 865--895. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cenfetelli, R. T., and Bassellier, G. (2009). "Interpretation of Formative Measurement in Information Systems Research." MIS Quarterly. Vol. 33, No. 4: pp. 689--707. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Chen, F., Bollen, K. A., Paxton, P., Curran, P. J., and Kirby, J. B. (2001). "Improper Solutions in Structural Equation Models." Sociological Methods & Research. Vol. 29, No. 4: pp. 468--508.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Chin, W. W. (1995). "Partial Least Squares Is to Lisrel as Principal Components Analysis Is to Common Factor Analysis." Technology Studies. Vol. 2, No. : pp. 315--319.Google Scholar
- Chin, W. W. (1998). "Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling." MIS Quarterly. Vol. 22, No. 1: pp. vii--xvi. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., and Newsted, P. R. (2003). "A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects:Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Studyand an Electronic-Mail Emotion/Adoption Study." Information Systems Research. Vol. 14, No. 2: pp. 189--217. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chin, W. W., and Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural Equation Modeling Analysis with Small Samples Using Partial Least Squares, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Chin, W. W., Peterson, R. A., and Brown, S. P. (2008). "Structural Equation Modeling in Marketing: Some Practical Reminders." The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice. Vol. 16, No. 4: pp. 287--298.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Coltman, T., Devinney, T. M., Midgley, D. F., and Venaik, S. (2008). "Formative Versus Reflective Measurement Models: Two Applications of Formative Measurement." Journal of Business Research. Vol. 61, No. 12: pp. 1250--1262.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Davis, F. D. (1989). "Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology." MIS quarterly. Vol. No. pp. 319--340. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Diamantopoulos, A. (2006). "The Error Term in Formative Measurement Models: Interpretation and Modeling Implications." Journal of Modelling in Management. Vol. 1, No. 1: pp. 7--17.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Diamantopoulos, A. (2011). "Incorporating Formative Measures into Covariance-Based Structural Equation Models." MIS Quarterly. Vol. 35, No. 2: pp. 335--358. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Diamantopoulos, A., Riefler, P., and Roth, K. P. (2008). "Advancing Formative Measurement Models." Journal of Business Research. Vol. 61, No. 12: pp. 1203--1218.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Diamantopoulos, A., and Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). "Index Construction with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development." Journal of Marketing Research. Vol. 38, No. 2: pp. 269--277.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Edwards, J. R. (2001). "Multidimensional Constructs in Organizational Behavior Research: An Integrative Analytical Framework." Organizational Research Methods. Vol. 4, No. 2: pp. 144--192.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Edwards, J. R. (2011). "The Fallacy of Formative Measurement." Organizational Research Methods. Vol. 14, No. 2: pp. 370--388.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Edwards, J. R., and Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). "On the Nature and Direction of Relationships between Constructs and Measures." Psychological Methods. Vol. 5, No. 2: pp. 155--174.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fornell, C., and Larcker, D. (1987). "A Second Generation of Multivariate Analysis: Classification of Methods and Implications for Marketing Research." Review of marketing. Vol. 51, No. pp. 407--450.Google Scholar
- Gefen, D., Straub, D., and Boudreau, M. (2000). "Structural Equation Modelingand Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice." Communications of AIS. Vol. 4, No. 7: pp. 1--78.Google Scholar
- Goodhue, D., Lewis, W., and Thompson, R. (2007). "Statistical Power in Analyzing Interaction Effects: Questioning the Advantage of Pls with Product Indicators." Information Systems Research. Vol. 18, No. 2: pp. 211--227. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Goodhue, D., Lewis, W., and Thompson, R. L. (Year)."Pls, Small Sample Size, and Statistical Power in MIS Research," Proceedings of Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1--10. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., and Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. (2011). "Pls-Sem: Indeed a Silver Bullet." The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice. Vol. 19, No. 2: pp. 139--152.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hardin, A. M., Chang, J. C., and Fuller, M. A. (2008). "Clarifying the Use of Formative Measurement in the IS Discipline: The Case of Computer Self-Efficacy." Journal of the Association for Information Systems. Vol. 9, No. 9: pp. 544--546.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hardin, A. M., Chang, J. C. J., Fuller, M. A., and Torkzadeh, G. (2011). "Formative Measurement and Academic Research: In Search of Measurement Theory." Educational and Psychological Measurement. Vol. 71, No. 2: pp. 281--305.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Holmes, T. H., and Rahe, R. H. (1967). "Social Readjustment Rating Scale." Journal Of Psychosomatic Research. Vol. 11, No. 2: pp. 213--218.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jarvis, C. B., Mackenzie, S. B., and Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). "A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research." Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 30, No. 2: pp. 199--218.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jöreskog, K. G., and Goldberger, A. S. (1975). "Estimation of a Model with Multiple Indicators and Multiple Causes of a Single Latent Variable." Journal of the American Statistical Association. Vol. 70, No. pp. 631--639.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kerlinger, F. N., and Lee, H. B. (1999). Foundations of Behavioral Research, Wadsworth Publishing.Google Scholar
- Kim, G., Shin, B., and Grover, V. (2010). "Investigating Two Contradictory Views of Formative Measurement in Information Systems Research." MIS Quarterly. Vol. 34, No. 2: pp. 345--365. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- MacCallum, R. C., and Browne, M. W. (1993). "The Use of Causal Indicators in Covariance Structure Models -- Some Practical Issues." Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 114, No. 3: pp. 533--541.Google ScholarCross Ref
- MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., and Jarvis, C. B. (2005). "The Problem of Measurement Model Misspecification in Behavioral and Organizational Research and Some Recommended Solutions." Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 90, No. 4: pp. 710--730.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Marakas, G., Johnson, R. D., and Clay, P. F. (2008). "Formative Vs. Reflective Measurement: A Reply to Hardin, Chang, and Fuller." Journal of the Association for Information Systems. Vol. 9, No. 9: pp.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Marcoulides, G. A., and Saunders, C. (2006). "Pls: A Silver Bullet?" MIS Quarterly. Vol. 30, No. 2: pp. iii--ix. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mathieson, K., Peacock, E., and Chin, W. W. (2001). "Extending the Technology Acceptance Model: The Influence of Perceived User Resources." ACM SIGMIS Database. Vol. 32, No. 3: pp. 86--112. Google ScholarDigital Library
- McDonald, R. P. (1996). "Path Analysis with Composite Variables." Multivariate Behavioral Research. Vol. 31, No. 2: pp. 239--270.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Petter, S., Rai, A., and Straub, D. W. (2012). "The Critical Importance of Construct Measurement Specification: A Response to Aguirre-Urreta and Marakas." Management Information Systems Quarterly. Vol. 36, No. 1: pp. 147--155. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Petter, S., Straub, D. W., and Rai, A. (2007). "Specifying Formative Constructs in Information Systems Research." MIS Quarterly. Vol. 31, No. 4: pp. 623. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Qureshi, I., and Compeau, D. (2009). "Assessing between-Group Differences in Information Systems Research: A Comparison of Covariance-and Component-Based Sem." MIS Quarterly. Vol. 33, No. 1: pp. 197--214. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Reinartz, W., Haenlein, M., and Henseler, J. (2009). "A Empirical Comparison of the Efficacy of Covariance-Based and Variance-Based Sem." International Journal of Research in Marketing. Vol. 26, No. 4: pp. 332--344.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ringle, C., Sarstedt, M., and Straub, D. (2012). "A Critical Look at the Use of Pls-Sem in MIS Quarterly." MIS Quarterly. Vol. 36, No. 1: pp. iii--xiv. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Roberts, N., and Thatcher, J. (2009). "Conceptualizing and Testing Formative Constructs: Tutorial and Annotated Example." ACM SIGMIS Database. Vol. 40, No. 3: pp. 9--39. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shin, B., and Kim, G. (2011). "Investigating the Reliability of Second-Order Formative Measurement in Information Systems Research." European Journal of Information Systems. Vol. 20, No. 5: pp. 608--623.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sosik, J. J., Kahai, S. S., and Piovoso, M. J. (2009). "Silver Bullet or Voodoo Statistics?" Group & Organization Management. Vol. 34, No. 1: pp. 5--36.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tojib, D. R., and Sugianto, L. F. (2006). "Content Validity of Instruments in IS Research." Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA). Vol. 8, No. 3: pp. 31--56.Google Scholar
- Van Den Wollenberg, A. L. (1977). "Redundancy Analysis an Alternative for Canonical Correlation Analysis." Psychometrika. Vol. 42, No. 2: pp. 207--219.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Venkatesh, V., and Davis, F. D. (1996). "A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test*." Decision sciences. Vol. 27, No. 3: pp. 451--481.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- The analysis of formative measurement in IS research: choosing between component-and covariance-based techniques
Recommendations
Interpretation of formative measurement in information systems research
Within the Information Systems literature, there has been an emerging interest in the use of formative measurement in structural equation modeling (SEM). This interest is exemplified by descriptions of the nature of formative measurement (e.g., Chin ...
Investigating two contradictory views of formative measurement in information systems research
The use of formative measurement in the field of Information Systems has increased, arguably due to statistical tools (e.g., PLS) that can test such models. However, in the literature, there exist two contradictory views on the potential deficiency of ...
Formative measurement: a critical perspective
The past five years have witnessed a plethora of articles on the topic of formative measurement, both in the IS area and in other disciplines. This work can best be described as divergent and often contradictory. In this paper we review the issues ...
Comments