IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v69y2016i8p3177-3185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing reflective and formative measures: New insights from relevant simulations

Author

Listed:
  • Chang, Woojung
  • Franke, George R.
  • Lee, Nick

Abstract

Previous simulations comparing formative and reflective models specify formative population models as the only correct model for a given construct, and compare them with various mis-specified reflective models. However, this approach does not generalize to situations where both reflective and formative specifications can work well to assess constructs. To address this limitation, this study presents simulations in which both formative and reflective specifications fit the underlying population data equally well. The results show that reflective specifications generate less biased and more powerful results than formative specifications, and make a strong case for considering standardized rather than unstandardized coefficients for both specifications. Therefore, conceptual and empirical consequences of using reflective models for constructs that could also be modeled as formative are less dire than past research has suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:69:y:2016:i:8:p:3177-3185
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296315006311
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.006?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. Rigopoulou, Irini & Theodosiou, Marios & Katsikea, Evangelia & Perdikis, Nicholas, 2012. "Information control, role perceptions, and work outcomes of boundary-spanning frontline managers," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(5), pages 626-633.
    3. Coltman, Tim & Devinney, Timothy M. & Midgley, David F. & Venaik, Sunil, 2008. "Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 1250-1262, December.
    4. Jarvis, Cheryl Burke & MacKenzie, Scott B & Podsakoff, Philip M, 2003. "A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 199-218, September.
    5. Challagalla, Goutam N. & Shervani, Tasadduq A., 1997. "A measurement model of the dimensions and types of output and behavior control: An empirical test in a salesforce context," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 159-172, July.
    6. Franke, George R. & Preacher, Kristopher J. & Rigdon, Edward E., 2008. "Proportional structural effects of formative indicators," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 1229-1237, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Cadogan, John W. & Lee, Nick, 2013. "Improper use of endogenous formative variables," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 233-241.
    9. Dirk Temme & Adamantios Diamantopoulos & Vanessa Pfegfeidel, 2014. "Specifying Formatively-measured Constructs In Endogenous Positions In Structural Equation Models: Caveats and Guidelines For Researchers," Schumpeter Discussion Papers SDP14005, Universitätsbibliothek Wuppertal, University Library.
    10. Lee, Nick & Cadogan, John W., 2013. "Problems with formative and higher-order reflective variables," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 242-247.
    11. David R. Heise, 1972. "Employing Nominal Variables, Induced Variables, and Block Variables in Path Analyses," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 1(2), pages 147-173, November.
    12. Chang, Woojung & Park, Jeong Eun & Chaiy, Seoil, 2010. "How does CRM technology transform into organizational performance? A mediating role of marketing capability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(8), pages 849-855, August.
    13. Temme, Dirk & Diamantopoulos, Adamantios & Pfegfeidel, Vanessa, 2014. "Specifying formatively-measured constructs in endogenous positions in structural equation models: Caveats and guidelines for researchers," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 309-316.
    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. 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).
    2. Sarstedt, Marko & Hair, Joseph F. & Ringle, Christian M. & Thiele, Kai O. & Gudergan, Siegfried P., 2016. "Estimation issues with PLS and CBSEM: Where the bias lies!," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 3998-4010.
    3. Kianto, Aino & Sáenz, Josune & Aramburu, Nekane, 2017. "Knowledge-based human resource management practices, intellectual capital and innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 11-20.

    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, 2013. "The MIMIC model and formative variables: problems and solutions," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(1), pages 3-17, March.
    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. Sarstedt, Marko & Hair, Joseph F. & Ringle, Christian M. & Thiele, Kai O. & Gudergan, Siegfried P., 2016. "Estimation issues with PLS and CBSEM: Where the bias lies!," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 3998-4010.
    4. 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.
    5. Sajtos, Laszlo & Magyar, Bertalan, 2016. "Auxiliary theories as translation mechanisms for measurement model specification," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3186-3191.
    6. 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.
    7. Jeffrey G. Covin & William J. Wales, 2012. "The Measurement of Entrepreneurial Orientation," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 36(4), pages 677-702, July.
    8. Sebastian Hohenberg & Christian Homburg, 2019. "Enhancing innovation commercialization through supervisor–sales rep fit," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 681-701, July.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Grahame R. Dowling & Tayo Otubanjo, 2011. "Corporate and organizational identity: two sides of the same coin," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 1(3), pages 171-182, December.
    12. van Rekom, Johan & Go, Frank M. & Calter, Dayenne M., 2014. "Communicating a company's positive impact on society—Can plausible explanations secure authenticity?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(9), pages 1831-1838.
    13. Dirk Temme & Adamantios Diamantopoulos & Vanessa Pfegfeidel, 2014. "Specifying Formatively-measured Constructs In Endogenous Positions In Structural Equation Models: Caveats and Guidelines For Researchers," Schumpeter Discussion Papers SDP14005, Universitätsbibliothek Wuppertal, University Library.
    14. Diamantopoulos, Adamantios & Riefler, Petra & Roth, Katharina P., 2008. "Advancing formative measurement models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 1203-1218, December.
    15. Banjo Roxas, 2022. "Eco‐innovations of firms: A longitudinal analysis of the roles of industry norms and proactive environmental strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 515-531, January.
    16. Bèzes, Christophe, 2014. "Definition and psychometric validation of a measurement index common to website and store images," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(12), pages 2559-2578.
    17. 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.
    18. Rodgers, Waymond & Guiral, Andrés, 2011. "Potential model misspecification bias: Formative indicators enhancing theory for accounting researchers," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 25-50, March.
    19. 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.
    20. de Oliveira, Carla Albuquerque & Carneiro, Jorge & Esteves, Felipe, 2019. "Conceptualizing and measuring the “strategy execution” construct," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 333-344.

    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:69:y:2016:i:8:p:3177-3185. 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: 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.