forum.smartpls.com

Yes, you should not use Sobel, but only the T and P values from the bootstrapping for the indirect and direct effects. SmartPLS2, however, does not report the results for indirect effects, but only for direct and total effects. Thus, you have to use either SmartPLS3, which gives you all necessary r...

You need to assess the indirect effects for significance. You do not need to delete your mediator. If only your indirect effect is significant: full mediation. If both your indirect and direct effect are significant: partial mediation. If only your direct effect is significant and not the indirect ...

I have a model with 4 IV's, one mediator, one DV, and 2 control variables, and I'm wondering if I have measured my mediation effect in the correct way. I first removed the mediator from my model, and performed a bootstrapping in SmartPLS 2.0. After that, i added the mediator again, and performed aga...

I have some troubles with explaining a path coefficient, is it a kind of a correlation between 2 variables?

And if it is a kind of a correlation, what is the difference between a correlation and a path coefficient?

Hengkov wrote:Hi Twans,

Your result misleading, so cannot interpret before clear it (collinearity problem). Remove construct is bad option, try using mean centering or used two-step analysis.

Best Regards,
Hengky

What do you mean with 'mean centering, or 'two-step analysis'?

I have some constructs in my model that have a negative path coefficient: http://www.mijnalbum.nl/GroteFoto-QW7RK7SA.jpg This could mean that I have some collinearity issues, so I've measured the VIF values of the exogenous/independent constructs in WarpPLS. Two items have multicollinearity issues: ...

hmm nobody?

Weights and t- statistics in WarPLS are different from SmartPLS. Weights are different, all IQ items are significant in WarpPLS, and only 3 IQ items are significant in SmartPLS?: WarpPLS: http://www.mijnalbum.nl/GroteFoto-7Z8UYW6D.jpg SmartPLS http://www.mijnalbum.nl/GroteFoto-4QPFQGMD.jpg Additiona...

That is not what I mean. If you have a construct that is named: marketing mix, and you drop one item, it changes the meaning/nature of the marketingmix. Place isn't the same as promotion, and promotion isn't the same as product. They are different kind of items and should treated as formative. They ...

Thanks! The construct is international marketing mix adaptations, which we capture with the four Ps of the marketing mix: product, price, place, and promotion. A firm could adapt one aspect of the marketing mix (e.g. price), but not one or more of the other dimensions. This is why we expected to tr...

Thanks for your response. Can you please elaborate a little bit more? Like I said, we anticipated that the construct would be formative, because we didn't think the indicators would necessarily be highly correlated. However, as it turns out, the items are all positively correlated and it seems to m...

It depends on your items/indicators.

I have build a model with reflective and formative constructs. I know how I can test the reliability and validity of the reflective constructs, but I have some issues with testing the reliability and validity of the formative constructs. I follow the recommendations of Petter, Straub and Rai (2007),...

I'm wondering if my method is the right method to assess my validity, reliability, significance level and factor loadings (Yeah, I forgot the CV in smartPLS!): (I followed the video of James Gasking: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPeUTKjMF7o) My model http://www.mijnalbum.nl/GroteFoto-RQHMZZNH.jpg ...

A rejoinder to Twan Peters: I surprised and very glad with your comment above and some opinion about choice reflective or formative indicators. This is a important and special issue in some journal since four years ago. Until now, our discussion of construct and the measurement model has assumed re...