Page 1 of 1

Second order construct

Posted: Fri May 10, 2019 4:36 pm
by elmanzani
Hey,

I have used a second-order construct as a composite of A and B to evaluate the synergistic effect of A and B on C. Could you please suggest bibliographic references that theoretically justify the usefulness of a second-order construct for a synergistic effect between two variables.

Thanks.

Re: Second order construct

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 1:20 pm
by jmbecker
What do you mean by synergistic effects?

Re: Second order construct

Posted: Mon May 20, 2019 2:32 pm
by elmanzani
jmbecker wrote: Wed May 15, 2019 1:20 pm What do you mean by synergistic effects?
I mean the interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects.

Re: Second order construct

Posted: Mon May 20, 2019 8:05 pm
by jmbecker
In such a case you do not want to use second-order constructs. You want to look into the moderation topic. There you create interaction effects, that sound more like what you want to study.

Re: Second order construct

Posted: Tue May 21, 2019 4:42 pm
by elmanzani
jmbecker wrote: Mon May 20, 2019 8:05 pm In such a case you do not want to use second-order constructs. You want to look into the moderation topic. There you create interaction effects, that sound more like what you want to study.
I have followed some studies that use second-order construct to operationalize the complementarity effect, but they do not justify that, or how a second-order construct can be useful in this case?

For exemple:

Chen, J. L. (2012). The synergistic effects of IT-enabled resources on organizational capabilities and firm performance. Information & Management, 49(3-4), 142-150.

Bauer, F., & Matzler, K. (2014). Antecedents of M&A success: The role of strategic complementarity, cultural fit, and degree and speed of integration. Strategic management journal, 35(2), 269-291.

Re: Second order construct

Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 10:12 pm
by elmanzani
jmbecker wrote: Mon May 20, 2019 8:05 pm In such a case you do not want to use second-order constructs. You want to look into the moderation topic. There you create interaction effects, that sound more like what you want to study.
I have used a second-order construct as a composite of A and B to evaluate the synergistic effect of A and B on a third variable C.

I have found that for the individual impacts of:

- A on C: b = 0.027 (non-significant), R² = 0.180

- B on C: b = 0.374***, R²: 0.180.

I have found that for the synergistic effect:

- the impact of the second-order construct (A+B) on C: b=0.396***; R² = 0.182


A reviewer told me that the procedure to operationalize the synergistic effect with a second order construct is not appropriate. Its comment is below:

“if you define synergy as the interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects. According to the results, there is nothing that proves that the combined effect is greater than the sum of the separate effects. For example, b (second-order construct) = 0.396 < b(a) = 0.027 + b(b) = 0.374. Also, there is not a real increase in R² from individuals’ (R² = 0.180) effect to synergistic effect (R² = 0.182)”.

My questions are:

- How could I justify the usefulness of a second-order construct for the operationalization of a synergistic effect.
- How could I explain the synergistic effect in my case even if it does not fit the definition of synergy?

Re: Second order construct

Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:50 am
by jmbecker
- How could I justify the usefulness of a second-order construct for the operationalization of a synergistic effect.
The simple answer is that the reviewer is correct. A second-order construct cannot be used to model synergistic effects as combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects.
- How could I explain the synergistic effect in my case even if it does not fit the definition of synergy?
I don't understand this question.