IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v193y2025ics0148296325001754.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Calibration experiments: An alternative to multi-method approaches for measurement validation in consumer research

Author

Listed:
  • Bach, Dominik R.
  • Rigdon, Edward E.
  • Sarstedt, Marko

Abstract

Measurement validation in consumer research is ideally performed within the context of a multi-trait multi-method matrix (MTMM). While statistically well developed, this approach has several shortcomings that limit its domain of application: (1) the requirement for sufficiently unrelated latent variables that can be measured with the same methods, (2) the requirement for conceptually different methods to disambiguate trait from methods, and most seriously (3) the difficulty in identifying a more valid over a less valid method. We compare the MTMM approach to experiment-based calibration, an alternative framework for validating those latent variables that can be externally manipulated. We show how calibration lets researchers make distinctions between even closely related measurement methods, dispenses with the need for unrelated latent variables, and enables optimization of the measurement evaluation procedure itself. Calibration can be an important part of an integrative validity argument in consumer research and, more broadly, across the social sciences.

Suggested Citation

  • Bach, Dominik R. & Rigdon, Edward E. & Sarstedt, Marko, 2025. "Calibration experiments: An alternative to multi-method approaches for measurement validation in consumer research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:193:y:2025:i:c:s0148296325001754
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115352
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296325001754
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115352?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.

    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:eee:jbrese:v:193:y:2025:i:c:s0148296325001754. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    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.