Page 1 of 1

Can someone tell me about the best values for AVE and GOF?

Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 5:00 pm
by salah
Hi there :)

I am new to this software. My sample size is not that large and = 69. I would like to conclude about the significance of my model. Can someone tell me what would be best values for AVE and GOF so my hypohesized model would fit my data?

Please advise

Salah

Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 9:11 pm
by Diogenes
Hi,

AVE > 0,5
GoF > 0,36

See:
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

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

Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. doi:10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202

Use the “search” function in this forum (right corner) this question already was answered.

Best regards,

Bido

Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 5:46 am
by salah
Thank you Prof.

Salah

GoF values for formative constructs

Posted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 2:34 pm
by Emma Wijnen
Is it true that I cannot calculate the GoF when I have a model that only has formative constructs? Because for the GoF I need the communality (AVE) and those values are not given for a model with formative constructs?

If I am right, what else can I do to assess the goodness of fit?

Re: GoF values for formative constructs

Posted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 4:48 pm
by nayabeyes
Hi,
Yes you are right.

Assessment of structure model (Hair et al., 2013. A primer on PLS-SEM - Book)
1. Check collinearity among the constructs
2. Bootstrapping to assess the significance of the path coefficient
3. R^2
4. Effect size (f^2)
5. Predictive relevance (q^2)
6. Do not use Gof

Posted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 3:17 pm
by El Lokalmatador
I have a model with a few single-item-constructs. All other constructs have reflective items.

When calculating GoF, shall I leave the singe-item-constructs out? Because of their AVE/Communalities of 1 they wind the GoF up.

Many thanks in advance

*edit:
I found the answer in this paper:

Henseler, J. and Sarstedt, M. (2012), "Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares path modeling," Computational Statistics.

As I thought it is recommended to leave singel-item constructs out of GoF-calculation for the reason I stated above.

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:31 pm
by Hengkov
Hi,

This is problem in formula GoF Absolute. If you leave single items construct out, the result will low and not explain models. Contrary, if you enter single items construct, the result will high and misleading. So, for alternative, you must compute GoF Relative.

Regards,

Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:56 am
by bwilson
Hengkov wrote:Hi,

This is problem in formula GoF Absolute. If you leave single items construct out, the result will low and not explain models. Contrary, if you enter single items construct, the result will high and misleading. So, for alternative, you must compute GoF Relative.

Regards,
Hi,
The PLS literature has not had much success in reporting and developing relevant GOF measures to date in my opinion.
Reviewers and journal editors do not look for them..

SO do not use it yet! That would be my suggestion.
regards,

Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:57 am
by bwilson
[quote="bwilson"][quote="Hengkov"]

Why not do a power analysis instead given your small sample size.

that would be more useful

brad