Dear all,
I am completely novice in statistics .I would be grateful if you could tell me which one should I chose in Bootstrapping Sign Changes ?
Which one should I chose in Bootstrappingelection Sign Chan
-
Diogenes
- PLS Super-Expert
- Posts: 899
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:13 pm
- Real name and title:
- Location: São Paulo - BRAZIL
- Contact:
Hi,
Some references about this:
Henseler et al. (2009, p.307) = use “individual sign changes”.
Tenenhaus et al. (2005, p.177) =
- “no sign changes” is very conservative (low t-values), they do not recommend it.
- Individual sign changes: The signs in each resample are made consistent with the signs in the original sample without ensuring a global coherence.
This option is not recommend in general because of the lack of global coherence.
- Construct level changes (default)
Hair Jr. et al. (2013, p.135-136) =
- 1st) Use “no sign change”, if result is significant --> conclusion = significant
- 2nd) Use “no sign change”, if result is not significant, use individual sign changes, if the results is not significant --> conclusion = not significant
- 3rd) Use “no sign change”, if result is not significant, use individual sign changes, if the results is significant --> use “construct level changes” --> conclusion = this last result
--> p.130-136 = Good explanation about bootstrap in SmartPLS.
I usually use “construct level changes”!
Hair Jr., J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (p. 307). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277–319. doi:10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014
Tenenhaus, M., Esposito Vinzi, V., Chatelin, Y.-M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159–205. doi:10.1016/j.csda.2004.03.005
Best regards,
Bido
Some references about this:
Henseler et al. (2009, p.307) = use “individual sign changes”.
Tenenhaus et al. (2005, p.177) =
- “no sign changes” is very conservative (low t-values), they do not recommend it.
- Individual sign changes: The signs in each resample are made consistent with the signs in the original sample without ensuring a global coherence.
This option is not recommend in general because of the lack of global coherence.
- Construct level changes (default)
Hair Jr. et al. (2013, p.135-136) =
- 1st) Use “no sign change”, if result is significant --> conclusion = significant
- 2nd) Use “no sign change”, if result is not significant, use individual sign changes, if the results is not significant --> conclusion = not significant
- 3rd) Use “no sign change”, if result is not significant, use individual sign changes, if the results is significant --> use “construct level changes” --> conclusion = this last result
--> p.130-136 = Good explanation about bootstrap in SmartPLS.
I usually use “construct level changes”!
Hair Jr., J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (p. 307). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277–319. doi:10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014
Tenenhaus, M., Esposito Vinzi, V., Chatelin, Y.-M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159–205. doi:10.1016/j.csda.2004.03.005
Best regards,
Bido
