结构方程模型的可靠性、收敛性和判别有效性报告:综述和最佳实践建议

IF 4.9 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Asia Pacific Journal of Management Pub Date : 2023-01-30 DOI:10.1007/s10490-023-09871-y
Gordon W. Cheung, Helena D. Cooper-Thomas, Rebecca S. Lau, Linda C. Wang
{"title":"结构方程模型的可靠性、收敛性和判别有效性报告:综述和最佳实践建议","authors":"Gordon W. Cheung,&nbsp;Helena D. Cooper-Thomas,&nbsp;Rebecca S. Lau,&nbsp;Linda C. Wang","doi":"10.1007/s10490-023-09871-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>\nMany constructs in management studies, such as perceptions, personalities, attitudes, and behavioral intentions, are not directly observable. Typically, empirical studies measure such constructs using established scales with multiple indicators. When the scales are used in a different population, the items are translated into other languages or revised to adapt to other populations, it is essential for researchers to report the quality of measurement scales before using them to test hypotheses. Researchers commonly report the quality of these measurement scales based on Cronbach’s alpha and confirmatory factor analysis results. However, these results are usually inadequate and sometimes inappropriate. Moreover, researchers rarely consider sampling errors for these psychometric quality measures. In this best practice paper, we first critically review the most frequently-used approaches in empirical studies to evaluate the quality of measurement scales when using structural equation modeling. Next, we recommend best practices in assessing reliability, convergent and discriminant validity based on multiple criteria and taking sampling errors into consideration. Then, we illustrate with numerical examples the application of a specifically-developed R package, measureQ, that provides a one-stop solution for implementing the recommended best practices and a template for reporting the results. measureQ is easy to implement, even for those new to R. Our overall aim is to provide a best-practice reference for future authors, reviewers, and editors in reporting and reviewing the quality of measurement scales in empirical management studies.\n</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8474,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Management","volume":"41 2","pages":"745 - 783"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10490-023-09871-y.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reporting reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modeling: A review and best-practice recommendations\",\"authors\":\"Gordon W. Cheung,&nbsp;Helena D. Cooper-Thomas,&nbsp;Rebecca S. Lau,&nbsp;Linda C. Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10490-023-09871-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>\\nMany constructs in management studies, such as perceptions, personalities, attitudes, and behavioral intentions, are not directly observable. Typically, empirical studies measure such constructs using established scales with multiple indicators. When the scales are used in a different population, the items are translated into other languages or revised to adapt to other populations, it is essential for researchers to report the quality of measurement scales before using them to test hypotheses. Researchers commonly report the quality of these measurement scales based on Cronbach’s alpha and confirmatory factor analysis results. However, these results are usually inadequate and sometimes inappropriate. Moreover, researchers rarely consider sampling errors for these psychometric quality measures. In this best practice paper, we first critically review the most frequently-used approaches in empirical studies to evaluate the quality of measurement scales when using structural equation modeling. Next, we recommend best practices in assessing reliability, convergent and discriminant validity based on multiple criteria and taking sampling errors into consideration. Then, we illustrate with numerical examples the application of a specifically-developed R package, measureQ, that provides a one-stop solution for implementing the recommended best practices and a template for reporting the results. measureQ is easy to implement, even for those new to R. Our overall aim is to provide a best-practice reference for future authors, reviewers, and editors in reporting and reviewing the quality of measurement scales in empirical management studies.\\n</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8474,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia Pacific Journal of Management\",\"volume\":\"41 2\",\"pages\":\"745 - 783\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10490-023-09871-y.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia Pacific Journal of Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10490-023-09871-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia Pacific Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10490-023-09871-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

管理研究中的许多概念,如认知、个性、态度和行为意向,都是无法直接观察到的。通常情况下,实证研究使用具有多个指标的既定量表来测量这些构念。当这些量表用于不同的人群、项目被翻译成其他语言或进行修订以适应其他人群时,研究人员在使用这些量表检验假设之前,必须报告测量量表的质量。研究人员通常根据 Cronbach's alpha 和确认性因子分析结果来报告这些测量量表的质量。然而,这些结果通常是不充分的,有时甚至是不恰当的。此外,研究人员很少考虑这些心理测量质量测量的抽样误差。在这篇最佳实践论文中,我们首先批判性地回顾了实证研究中最常用的方法,即在使用结构方程建模时评估测量量表的质量。接下来,我们将基于多重标准并考虑抽样误差,推荐评估信度、收敛效度和判别效度的最佳实践。我们的总体目标是为未来的作者、审稿人和编辑在实证管理研究中报告和审核测量量表的质量提供最佳实践参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reporting reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modeling: A review and best-practice recommendations

Many constructs in management studies, such as perceptions, personalities, attitudes, and behavioral intentions, are not directly observable. Typically, empirical studies measure such constructs using established scales with multiple indicators. When the scales are used in a different population, the items are translated into other languages or revised to adapt to other populations, it is essential for researchers to report the quality of measurement scales before using them to test hypotheses. Researchers commonly report the quality of these measurement scales based on Cronbach’s alpha and confirmatory factor analysis results. However, these results are usually inadequate and sometimes inappropriate. Moreover, researchers rarely consider sampling errors for these psychometric quality measures. In this best practice paper, we first critically review the most frequently-used approaches in empirical studies to evaluate the quality of measurement scales when using structural equation modeling. Next, we recommend best practices in assessing reliability, convergent and discriminant validity based on multiple criteria and taking sampling errors into consideration. Then, we illustrate with numerical examples the application of a specifically-developed R package, measureQ, that provides a one-stop solution for implementing the recommended best practices and a template for reporting the results. measureQ is easy to implement, even for those new to R. Our overall aim is to provide a best-practice reference for future authors, reviewers, and editors in reporting and reviewing the quality of measurement scales in empirical management studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
9.30%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: The Asia Pacific Journal of Management publishes original manuscripts on management and organizational research in the Asia Pacific region, encompassing Pacific Rim countries and mainland Asia. APJM focuses on the extent to which each manuscript addresses matters that pertain to the most fundamental question: “What determines organization success?” The major academic disciplines that we cover include entrepreneurship, human resource management, international business, organizational behavior, and strategic management. However, manuscripts that belong to other well-established disciplines such as accounting, economics, finance, marketing, and operations generally do not fall into the scope of APJM. We endeavor to be the major vehicle for exchange of ideas and research among management scholars within or interested in the broadly defined Asia Pacific region.Key features include: Rigor - maintained through strict review processes, high quality global reviewers, and Editorial Advisory and Review Boards comprising prominent researchers from many countries. Relevance - maintained by its focus on key management and organizational trends in the region. Uniqueness - being the first and most prominent management journal published in and about the fastest growing region in the world. Official affiliation - Asia Academy of ManagementFor more information, visit the AAOM website:www.baf.cuhk.edu.hk/asia-aom/ Officially cited as: Asia Pac J Manag
期刊最新文献
The price of kindness: perceived bribery pervasiveness and coping mechanisms in an emerging market Are executive pay and firm performance related? Evidence-based on meta-regression analysis Entrepreneurial alertness: A mechanism for innovation and growth in an emerging economy Let’s Talk about AI: Talking about AI is Positively Associated with AI Crafting Alert during what? Beyond the “Big O” to a culturally-cognizant, process view of entrepreneurial alertness
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1