IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/amsrev/v3y2013i1d10.1007_s13162-013-0038-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Formative variables are unreal variables: why the formative MIMIC model is invalid

Author

Listed:
  • John W. Cadogan

    (Loughborough University, School of Business and Economics, and Lappeenranta University of Technology School of Business)

  • Nick Lee

    (Aston University, Aston Business School)

  • Laura Chamberlain

    (Aston University, Aston Business School)

Abstract

In this rejoinder, we provide a response to the three commentaries written by Diamantopoulos, Howell, and Rigdon (all this issue) on our paper The MIMIC Model and Formative Variables: Problems and Solutions (also this issue). We contrast the approach taken in the latter paper (where we focus on clarifying the assumptions required to reject the formative MIMIC model) by spending time discussing what assumptions would be necessary to accept the use of the formative MIMIC model as a viable approach. Importantly, we clarify the implications of entity realism and show how it is entirely logical that some theoretical constructs can be considered to have real existence independent of their indicators, and some cannot. We show how the formative model only logically holds when considering these ‘unreal’ entities. In doing so, we provide important counter-arguments for much of the criticisms made in Diamantopoulos’ commentary, and the distinction also helps clarify a number of issues in the commentaries of Howell and Rigdon (both of which in general agree with our original paper). We draw together these various threads to provide a set of conceptual tools researchers can use when thinking about the entities in their theoretical models.

Suggested Citation

  • John W. Cadogan & Nick Lee & Laura Chamberlain, 2013. "Formative variables are unreal variables: why the formative MIMIC model is invalid," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(1), pages 38-49, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:amsrev:v:3:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s13162-013-0038-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s13162-013-0038-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13162-013-0038-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13162-013-0038-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wilcox, James B. & Howell, Roy D. & Breivik, Einar, 2008. "Questions about formative measurement," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 1219-1228, December.
    2. H.M. Blalock, 1975. "The Confounding of Measured and Unmeasured Variables," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 3(4), pages 355-383, May.
    3. Roy D. Howell, 2013. "Conceptual clarity in measurement—Constructs, composites, and causes: a commentary on Lee, Cadogan and Chamberlain," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(1), pages 18-23, March.
    4. Cadogan, John W. & Lee, Nick, 2013. "Improper use of endogenous formative variables," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 233-241.
    5. Edward E. Rigdon, 2013. "Lee, Cadogan, and Chamberlain: an excellent point . . . But what about that iceberg?," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(1), pages 24-29, March.
    6. Diamantopoulos, Adamantios, 2008. "Formative indicators: Introduction to the special issue," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 1201-1202, December.
    7. Adamantios Diamantopoulos, 2013. "MIMIC models and formative measurement: some thoughts on Lee, Cadogan & Chamberlain," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(1), pages 30-37, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marion Garaus & Udo Wagner, 2019. "Lost in the Store: Assessing the Confusion Potential of Store Environments," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 71(4), pages 413-441, October.
    2. Nick Lee & John W. Cadogan & Laura Chamberlain, 2014. "Material and efficient cause interpretations of the formative model: resolving misunderstandings and clarifying conceptual language," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 4(1), pages 32-43, June.
    3. Adamantios Diamantopoulos & Dirk Temme, 2013. "MIMIC models, formative indicators and the joys of research," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(3), pages 160-170, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nick Lee & John W. Cadogan & Laura Chamberlain, 2014. "Material and efficient cause interpretations of the formative model: resolving misunderstandings and clarifying conceptual language," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 4(1), pages 32-43, June.
    2. Adamantios Diamantopoulos & Dirk Temme, 2013. "MIMIC models, formative indicators and the joys of research," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(3), pages 160-170, September.
    3. Nick Lee & John W. Cadogan & Laura Chamberlain, 2013. "The MIMIC model and formative variables: problems and solutions," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(1), pages 3-17, March.
    4. John R. Rossiter, 2013. "Scientific progress in measurement theory?," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(3), pages 171-179, September.
    5. Chang, Woojung & Franke, George R. & Lee, Nick, 2016. "Comparing reflective and formative measures: New insights from relevant simulations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3177-3185.
    6. Valdivieso Taborga, Carlos Eduardo, 2013. "Comparación de los modelos formativo, reflexivo y de antecedentes de evaluación estudiantil del servicio de docencia || Comparison of Formative, Reflective, and Antecedents Models of Students Evaluati," Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa = Journal of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, vol. 16(1), pages 95-120, December.
    7. Bartikowski, Boris & Richard, Marie-Odile & Gierl, Heribert, 2023. "Fit or misfit of culture in marketing communication? Development of the culture-ladenness fit index," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    8. Navarro, Antonio & Losada, Fernando & Ruzo, Emilio & Díez, José A., 2010. "Implications of perceived competitive advantages, adaptation of marketing tactics and export commitment on export performance," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 49-58, January.
    9. Fabienne Fortanier & Ans Kolk & Jonatan Pinkse, 2011. "Harmonization in CSR Reporting," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 665-696, October.
    10. Baxter, Roger, 2009. "Reflective and formative metrics of relationship value: A commentary essay," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(12), pages 1370-1377, December.
    11. Cadogan, John W. & Lee, Nick, 2013. "Improper use of endogenous formative variables," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 233-241.
    12. Roy D. Howell, 2013. "Conceptual clarity in measurement—Constructs, composites, and causes: a commentary on Lee, Cadogan and Chamberlain," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(1), pages 18-23, March.
    13. Panagopoulos, Nikolaos G. & Avlonitis, George J., 2010. "Performance implications of sales strategy: The moderating effects of leadership and environment," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 46-57.
    14. Robaina-Calderín, Lorena & Martín-Santana, Josefa D. & Melián-Alzola, Lucía, 2023. "Prosocial customer in the public sector: A PLS-SEM analysis applied to blood donation (active donors)," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    15. Ivana Lolić & Marija Logarušić & Mirjana Čižmešija, 2022. "Recent Revision of the European Consumer Confidence Indicator: Is There any additional Space for Improvement?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 159(3), pages 845-863, February.
    16. Elena Grimaccia & Alessia Naccarato, 2020. "Confirmatory factor analysis to validate a new measure of food insecurity: perceived and actual constructs," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 1211-1232, August.
    17. Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Pertusa-Ortega, Eva M. & Molina-Azorín, José F., 2012. "Characteristics of organizational structure relating to hybrid competitive strategy: Implications for performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(7), pages 993-1002.
    18. Baumgartner, Hans & Weijters, Bert, 2019. "Measurement in Marketing," Foundations and Trends(R) in Marketing, now publishers, vol. 12(4), pages 278–400-2, December.
    19. Madeleine Feder & Barbara E. Weißenberger, 2019. "Understanding the behavioral gap: Why would managers (not) engage in CSR-related activities?," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 95-126, April.
    20. Jeffrey E. Stambaugh & John Martinez & G. T. Lumpkin & Niyati Kataria, 0. "How well do EO measures and entrepreneurial behavior match?," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-21.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:amsrev:v:3:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s13162-013-0038-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.