Search found 54 matches
- Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:41 pm
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: Moderators in PLS: Which modeling approach is appropriate?
- Replies: 8
- Views: 10829
Dear Sergeja, if your formative LV only has one indicator, things are not that difficult. Simply standardize your 4 indicators (f1, r1, r2, r3) and create 3 product-interaction-indicators (f1*r1, f1*r2, f1*r3) prior to loading the data into SmartPLS. You can then use the reflective mode to create an...
- Tue Apr 04, 2006 5:44 am
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: Path models with manifest variables PLS?
- Replies: 7
- Views: 6681
Hi all, I agree. The only way to do this in SmartPLS is to create an LV (bubble) for each indicator (square). Since the loading and weight will always be 1, it doesn't even matter whether you choose a reflective or formative measurement mode. However, if all your variables are measured by a single i...
- Tue Apr 04, 2006 5:39 am
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: comparison of path coefficients
- Replies: 2
- Views: 3770
Hi Sandra, given that - at a structural level - PLS is just a multiple regression between latent variables, your test should work. While the covariance of coefficients is not reported by SmartPLS, you could simply export the path coefficient data from the bootstrap report to Excel and then calculate...
- Tue Apr 04, 2006 5:32 am
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: Sample size
- Replies: 5
- Views: 6539
Hi Stefan, first of all, Chin's rule of thumb is only just that - a rule of thumb. If you want to dig deeper into sample size requirements, you have to do the following: 1) Define your structural/ measurement models 2) Form hypotheses about effect sizes of your predictors 3) Define an acceptable pow...
- Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:54 am
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: Moderators in PLS: Which modeling approach is appropriate?
- Replies: 8
- Views: 10829
Oliver, now we're really delving into the issues... ;-) Some comments on your comments: (A) Weight changes in independent LVs Let me clarify my earlier post a little bit here. I was not saying that any change (even the slightest) in the indicator weights is necessarily problematic. I was simply sayi...
- Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:15 pm
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: Moderators in PLS: Which modeling approach is appropriate?
- Replies: 8
- Views: 10829
Oliver, I'm struggling with similar issues in my path model. Not that I'm any closer to a definitive answer to your questions, but here's my current thinking on the available options: (A) Singling out the effect into a simple 4 LV-PLS-model: Y=b1*X+b2*Z+b3*X*Z This is only valid if the indicator wei...
- Tue Mar 14, 2006 2:09 pm
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: Bootstrapping t-values
- Replies: 21
- Views: 27085
- Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:13 am
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: Multi-group comparisons with PLS
- Replies: 59
- Views: 66511
Hi Christian, thank you for pointing this out (SE=Bootstrap Stdev). This certainly explains why the formula didn't work earlier. However, I'm still not sure how to properly apply the formula. In particular, I have found two different versions of the formula: Version 1 (from Chin's homepage): S_Poole...
- Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:58 am
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: Multi-group comparisons with PLS
- Replies: 59
- Views: 66511
Jörg/ Christian, thank you both for your helpful comments. Chin's suggested approach for using bootstrap parameters in a parametric sense is actually what I tried first. However, his formula gave me very high t-values even for the smallest coefficient differences (e.g., t=18.3 for a path difference ...
- Fri Mar 03, 2006 2:24 pm
- Forum: SmartPLS 2 - Bugs
- Topic: (Non)-Random Number Seed for Bootstrapping
- Replies: 8
- Views: 12656
- Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:47 pm
- Forum: SmartPLS 2 - Bugs
- Topic: (Non)-Random Number Seed for Bootstrapping
- Replies: 8
- Views: 12656
Dear Sven, thanks for looking into this so quickly. However, I'm still not convinced that the problem you described is cause for the resample-duplications. I just opened SmartPLS fresh from the Start Menu. Then I opened my simple path model (see above) and ran a bootstrap. Looking at the results sti...
- Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:24 pm
- Forum: Method and application
- Topic: Multi-group comparisons with PLS
- Replies: 59
- Views: 66511
All, since nobody has answered my post, I had to find a way to solve this myself ;-). I'm posting the procedure here for anyone who is interested (feedback highly welcome): A) run the model with the full data set in PLS and save the LV-scores B) split the file with the LV-scores into two subgroups y...
- Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:05 pm
- Forum: SmartPLS 2 - Bugs
- Topic: (Non)-Random Number Seed for Bootstrapping
- Replies: 8
- Views: 12656
- Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:22 pm
- Forum: SmartPLS 2 - Bugs
- Topic: (Non)-Random Number Seed for Bootstrapping
- Replies: 8
- Views: 12656
(Non)-Random Number Seed for Bootstrapping
Dear Development Team, I think I may have discovered an issue with the bootstrap estimates for very simple path models on fast computers: Apparently, the seed for the random number generator (RNG) used to select cases for the bootstrap samples does not always change from run to run. I suspect that s...
- Mon Feb 13, 2006 2:13 pm
- Forum: SmartPLS 2 - FAQ
- Topic: Calculation of INTERACTION EFFECTS
- Replies: 8
- Views: 8163
Christian, great news! I would certainly like to see the following way of calculating interaction indicators implemented in the next release: 1. Standardize indicators for A and B 2. Create interaction indicators for A*B (multiplying standardized scores) 3. Run PLS Model This would be true to the pr...