Chen says ..(Chin, W. W. (1998). Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1), pp. vii – xvi. Online: http://www.misq.org/archivist/vol/no22/ ... mntry.html)
"Instead, closer attention should be paid to the predictiveness of the model. Are the structural paths and loadings of substantial strength as opposed to just statistically significant? Standardized paths should be around 0.20 and ideally above 0.30 in order to be considered meaningful. Meehl (1990) has argued that anything lower may be due to what he has termed the crud factor where “everything correlate to some extent with everything else” (p. 204) due to “some complex unknown network of genetic and environmental factors” (p. 209). Furthermore, paths of .10, for example, represents at best a 1 percent explanation of variance. Thus, even if they are “real”, are constructs with such paths theoretically interesting?" "
But I see number of articles where path coefficients with much less values (but significant) are reported.
Please tell me how strictly one should follow the minimum value of 0.2