IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jdataj/v8y2023i2p32-d1051233.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

LGCM and PLS-SEM in Panel Survey Data: A Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Zulkifli Mohd Ghazali

    (Mathematical Sciences Studies, College of Computing, Informatics and Media, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Cawangan Perak, Kampus Tapah, Tapah Road 35400, Perak, Malaysia)

  • Wan Fairos Wan Yaacob

    (Mathematical Sciences Studies, College of Computing, Informatics and Media, Universiti Teknologi MARA Cawangan Kelantan, Kampus Kota Bharu, Kota Bharu 15050, Kelantan, Malaysia
    Institute for Big Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence (IBDAAI), Kompleks Al-Khawarizmi, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam 40450, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Wan Marhaini Wan Omar

    (Faculty of Business and Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA Cawangan Kelantan, Kampus Kota Bharu, Kota Bharu 15050, Kelantan, Malaysia)

Abstract

The application of Latent Growth Curve Model (LGCM) and Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) has gained much attention in panel survey studies. This study explores the distributions and trends of LGCM, and PLS-SEM used in panel survey data. It highlights the gaps in the current and existing approaches of PLS-SEM practiced by researchers in analyzing panel survey data. The integrated bibliometric analysis and systematic review were employed in this study. Based on the reviewed articles, the LGCM and PLS-SEM showed an increasing trend of publication in the panel survey data. Though the popularity of LGCM was more outstanding than PLS-SEM for the panel survey data, LGCM has several limitations such as statistical assumptions, reliable sample size, number of repeated measures, and missing data. This systematic review identified five different approaches of PLS-SEM in analyzing the panel survey data namely pre- and post-approach with different constructs, a path comparison approach, a cross-lagged approach, pre- and post-approach with the same constructs, and an evaluation approach practiced by researchers. None of the previous approaches used can establish one structural model to represent the whole changes in the repeated measure. Thus, the findings of this paper could help researchers choose a more appropriate approach to analyzing panel survey data.

Suggested Citation

  • Zulkifli Mohd Ghazali & Wan Fairos Wan Yaacob & Wan Marhaini Wan Omar, 2023. "LGCM and PLS-SEM in Panel Survey Data: A Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Data, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-24, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jdataj:v:8:y:2023:i:2:p:32-:d:1051233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5729/8/2/32/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5729/8/2/32/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donthu, Naveen & Kumar, Satish & Mukherjee, Debmalya & Pandey, Nitesh & Lim, Weng Marc, 2021. "How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 285-296.
    2. Weishu Liu, 2019. "The data source of this study is Web of Science Core Collection? Not enough," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1815-1824, December.
    3. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    4. Xu, Xinhan & Chen, Xiangfeng & Jia, Fu & Brown, Steve & Gong, Yu & Xu, Yifan, 2018. "Supply chain finance: A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 160-173.
    5. Muñoz, Elizabeth & Robins, Richard W. & Sutin, Angelina R., 2022. "Perceived ethnic discrimination and cognitive function: A 12-year longitudinal study of Mexican-origin adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 311(C).
    6. Anne-Wil Harzing & Satu Alakangas, 2016. "Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 787-804, February.
    7. Cobo, M.J. & López-Herrera, A.G. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F., 2011. "An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 146-166.
    8. Satish Kumar & Riya Sureka & Sisira Colombage, 2020. "Capital structure of SMEs: a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 535-565, November.
    9. Roemer, Ellen & Henseler, Jörg, 2022. "The dynamics of electric vehicle acceptance in corporate fleets: Evidence from Germany," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    10. Christian Nitzl & Wynne W. Chin, 2017. "The case of partial least squares (PLS) path modeling in managerial accounting research," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 137-156, May.
    11. Junwen Zhu & Weishu Liu, 2020. "A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 321-335, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Shome, Samik & Hassan, M. Kabir & Verma, Sushma & Panigrahi, Tushar Ranjan, 2023. "Impact investment for sustainable development: A bibliometric analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 770-800.
    2. Lages, Cristiana R. & Perez-Vega, Rodrigo & Kadić-Maglajlić, Selma & Borghei-Razavi, Niloofar, 2023. "A systematic review and bibliometric analysis of the dark side of customer behavior: An integrative customer incivility framework," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    3. Shuangqing Sheng & Wei Song & Hua Lian & Lei Ning, 2022. "Review of Urban Land Management Based on Bibliometrics," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-25, November.
    4. Albiona Pestisha & Zoltán Gabnai & Aidana Chalgynbayeva & Péter Lengyel & Attila Bai, 2023. "On-Farm Renewable Energy Systems: A Systematic Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-25, January.
    5. Weisheng Chiu & Thomas Chun Man Fan & Sang-Back Nam & Ping-Hung Sun, 2021. "Knowledge Mapping and Sustainable Development of eSports Research: A Bibliometric and Visualized Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Gricelda Herrera-Franco & Néstor Montalván-Burbano & Carlos Mora-Frank & Lady Bravo-Montero, 2021. "Scientific Research in Ecuador: A Bibliometric Analysis," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-34, December.
    7. Valentina Della Corte & Giovanna Del Gaudio & Fabiana Sepe & Simone Luongo, 2021. "Destination Resilience and Innovation for Advanced Sustainable Tourism Management: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Büşra Ayan & Elif Güner & Semen Son-Turan, 2022. "Blockchain Technology and Sustainability in Supply Chains and a Closer Look at Different Industries: A Mixed Method Approach," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-39, December.
    9. Guangyuan Hu & Lei Wang & Rong Ni & Weishu Liu, 2020. "Which h-index? An exploration within the Web of Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(3), pages 1225-1233, June.
    10. Cathaysa Martín-Blanco & Montserrat Zamorano & Carmen Lizárraga & Valentin Molina-Moreno, 2022. "The Impact of COVID-19 on the Sustainable Development Goals: Achievements and Expectations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-25, December.
    11. Goodell, John W. & Kumar, Satish & Lahmar, Oumaima & Pandey, Nitesh, 2023. "A bibliometric analysis of cultural finance," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    12. Lopreite, Milena & Misuraca, Michelangelo & Puliga, Michelangelo, 2023. "An analysis of the thematic evolution of ageing and healthcare expenditure using word embedding: A scoping review of policy implications," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PB).
    13. Andrés Martínez-Medina & Sonia Morales-Calvo & Vicenta Rodríguez-Martín & Víctor Meseguer-Sánchez & Valentín Molina-Moreno, 2022. "Sixteen Years since the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: What Have We Learned since Then?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-21, September.
    14. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    15. Cristina Mele & Jaqueline Pels & Maria Spano & Irene Bernardo, 2023. "Emergent understandings of the market," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2023(1), pages 1-25, March.
    16. Sónia Rolland Sobral, 2021. "Teaching and Learning to Program: Umbrella Review of Introductory Programming in Higher Education," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(15), pages 1-23, July.
    17. Mathew Kevin Bosi & Nelson Lajuni & Avnner Chardles Wellfren & Thien Sang Lim, 2022. "Sustainability Reporting through Environmental, Social, and Governance: A Bibliometric Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-22, September.
    18. Boubaker, Sabri & Goodell, John W. & Kumar, Satish & Sureka, Riya, 2023. "COVID-19 and finance scholarship: A systematic and bibliometric analysis," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    19. Badr Moutik & John Summerscales & Jasper Graham-Jones & Richard Pemberton, 2023. "Life Cycle Assessment Research Trends and Implications: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-45, September.
    20. Norhazimah Che Hassan & Aisyah Abdul-Rahman & Syajarul Imna Mohd Amin & Siti Ngayesah Ab Hamid, 2023. "Investment Intention and Decision Making: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, February.

    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:gam:jdataj:v:8:y:2023:i:2:p:32-:d:1051233. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.