Hi all,
I conducted PLS-MGA for two groups and found out that there are no significant differences between path coefficients of the two groups (i used parametric approaches to test the difference)...That means i am not going to reject the null hypothesis. How should i interpret this result? Does this result lead to the conclusion that there is no observed heterogeneity? If so, is this conclusion is going to be meaningful?
Thanks in Advance,
Get
MGA result interpretation
Re: MGA result interpretation
Hi there,
I am running SmartPLS 3 and try to conduct an MGA.
How do I interpret the t-values? According to Sarstedt, Henseler, Ringle (2011), it is not sound to compare if a path coefficient of group A is larger than one of group B and if a different path coefficient of group B is larger than the one of group A at the same time.
Is that still true for the SmartPLS 3 Henseler's MGA? Or is it safe to interpret p values of smaller than .05 and larger than .95 as indicating that the path coefficient of group A is larger than the one of group B (for .05) and the coefficient of B is larger than A (for .95)?
I have tried to switch both groups in the MGA, but the results stay the same!
I have chosen a Bootstrapping significance level of .05 (two tailed). Would I thus interpret the results also at a .05 significance level, or is that then a .1 significance level, because I consider both tails at .05?
Thanks a lot for a clarification!
I am running SmartPLS 3 and try to conduct an MGA.
How do I interpret the t-values? According to Sarstedt, Henseler, Ringle (2011), it is not sound to compare if a path coefficient of group A is larger than one of group B and if a different path coefficient of group B is larger than the one of group A at the same time.
Is that still true for the SmartPLS 3 Henseler's MGA? Or is it safe to interpret p values of smaller than .05 and larger than .95 as indicating that the path coefficient of group A is larger than the one of group B (for .05) and the coefficient of B is larger than A (for .95)?
I have tried to switch both groups in the MGA, but the results stay the same!
I have chosen a Bootstrapping significance level of .05 (two tailed). Would I thus interpret the results also at a .05 significance level, or is that then a .1 significance level, because I consider both tails at .05?
Thanks a lot for a clarification!
Re: MGA result interpretation
Sorry,
I just found the answer to my question: It says in Smart PLS 3:
Henseler MGA:
This method is a non-parametric significance test for the difference of group-specific results that builds on PLS-SEM bootstrapping results. A result is significant at the 5% probability of error level, if the p-value is smaller than 0.05 or larger than 0.95 for a certain difference of group-specific path coefficients.
I just found the answer to my question: It says in Smart PLS 3:
Henseler MGA:
This method is a non-parametric significance test for the difference of group-specific results that builds on PLS-SEM bootstrapping results. A result is significant at the 5% probability of error level, if the p-value is smaller than 0.05 or larger than 0.95 for a certain difference of group-specific path coefficients.
Re: MGA result interpretation
Where exactly did you find this quote?nicefreak wrote:Sorry,
I just found the answer to my question: It says in Smart PLS 3:
Henseler MGA:
This method is a non-parametric significance test for the difference of group-specific results that builds on PLS-SEM bootstrapping results. A result is significant at the 5% probability of error level, if the p-value is smaller than 0.05 or larger than 0.95 for a certain difference of group-specific path coefficients.
Re: MGA result interpretation
I found it ;).