forum.smartpls.com

Posted: **Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:45 am**

Hi all
I have a construct which is shown to have low (0.015) f square to a DV. However the path coefficients from pointing that construct to the DV, directly and indirectly, are significant and the total effect of that construct to the DV is actually high. As f square essentially measures the impact to a DV with and without a particular IV, how can I interpret this seemingly contradicting result? If the total effect is high, taking out that construct should have significant impact (higher f2) to that DV?

Posted: **Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:18 pm**

The relative impact may be large, but if you omit the construct other construct will take its role and explain the same variance in the dependent construct. This is likely due to some (high) collinearity between the variables.

Posted: **Fri Nov 15, 2019 11:47 pm**

Thanks Dr Becker, that explains it and makes sense.

Posted: **Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:26 pm**

How high collinearity are we talking here exactly, Dr Becker?

Posted: **Thu Sep 24, 2020 6:45 pm**

If I have two formative constructs in the second order. One is Independent and the other is dependent. How would I interpret the F square value of 4.34?

forum.smartpls.com

How to interpret good path coefficients and total effect but low f square?

How to interpret good path coefficients and total effect but low f square?

Re: How to interpret good path coefficients and total effect but low f square?

Re: How to interpret good path coefficients and total effect but low f square?

Re: How to interpret good path coefficients and total effect but low f square?

Re: How to interpret good path coefficients and total effect but low f square?