loadings value
loadings value
I would like to know which is the minimum acceptable value of the "loadings" (0.6 or 0.7).
Thank you
Thank you
- Diogenes
- PLS Super-Expert
- Posts: 899
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:13 pm
- Real name and title:
- Location: São Paulo - BRAZIL
- Contact:
Hi Miguel,
It is recommended 0,7 because 0,7^2 = 0,49
49% (almost 50%) of the variance of the indicator is explained by its LV.
Remenbering that AVE also should be > 50% (all loading = 0,7; the AVE will be 49%).
In practical cases we have some indicators lower than 0,7, but others bigger than 0,7, with AVE > 0,5;
in this case is common to keep the indicator even when its loading < 0,7, mainly in cases where we have just 3 or 4 indicators.
Best regards.
Bido
It is recommended 0,7 because 0,7^2 = 0,49
49% (almost 50%) of the variance of the indicator is explained by its LV.
Remenbering that AVE also should be > 50% (all loading = 0,7; the AVE will be 49%).
In practical cases we have some indicators lower than 0,7, but others bigger than 0,7, with AVE > 0,5;
in this case is common to keep the indicator even when its loading < 0,7, mainly in cases where we have just 3 or 4 indicators.
Best regards.
Bido
Can Outer Loadings be negative for a reflective indicator
Hi,
Can Outer Loadings be negative for a reflective indicator.
In my case 3 out 6 indicators for a reflective dimension have a negative outler loading.
Thanks,
Nitin
Can Outer Loadings be negative for a reflective indicator.
In my case 3 out 6 indicators for a reflective dimension have a negative outler loading.
Thanks,
Nitin
- Diogenes
- PLS Super-Expert
- Posts: 899
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:13 pm
- Real name and title:
- Location: São Paulo - BRAZIL
- Contact:
Hi Nitin,
It could be a problem because this has a influence in the signal of the structural paths (could change the signal).
I suggest that:
1) Compare these results with the simple correlations between these indicators (the signals should be the same)
2) You could invert the scale of some indicators to have all of them with positive correlations.
3) After that, the results in SmartPLS will be more interpretable.
Best regards.
Bido
It could be a problem because this has a influence in the signal of the structural paths (could change the signal).
I suggest that:
1) Compare these results with the simple correlations between these indicators (the signals should be the same)
2) You could invert the scale of some indicators to have all of them with positive correlations.
3) After that, the results in SmartPLS will be more interpretable.
Best regards.
Bido
Re: loadings value
And these results should be taken from the "Cross loading" under "Quality criteria" section in the the regular (not Bootstrap) results? Just to be sure!lopez wrote:I would like to know which is the minimum acceptable value of the "loadings" (0.6 or 0.7).
Thank you
Thank you,
Pankaj
professorDiogenes wrote:Hi Nitin,
It could be a problem because this has a influence in the signal of the structural paths (could change the signal).
I suggest that:
2) You could invert the scale of some indicators to have all of them with positive correlations.
Bido
How to invert the scale of indicators that have negative sign in PLS?
Thanks in advance!
-
- PLS Junior User
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 6:22 am
- Real name and title:
loadings
is it possible for loadings to exceed 1 ?
- Diogenes
- PLS Super-Expert
- Posts: 899
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:13 pm
- Real name and title:
- Location: São Paulo - BRAZIL
- Contact:
Hi,
1) Some references about reverse coded item:
Nunnally, J. C. & Bernstein I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory. 3rd Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. (see p.326).
Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling Procedures: Issues and Applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. (see p.99).
DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale Development: theory and applications. 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. (see pp.91-92).
Spector, P. E. (1992). Summated Rating Scale Construction: an introduction. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. (see p.22).
2) Outer loading usually is standardized (like correlations between LV and its reflective indicators), for this reason, it is not expected that its value be greater than 1.
If you are using formative indicators, the outer weights could have values greater than 1 because the multicollinearity between them.
Best regards,
Bido
1) Some references about reverse coded item:
Nunnally, J. C. & Bernstein I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory. 3rd Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. (see p.326).
Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling Procedures: Issues and Applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. (see p.99).
DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale Development: theory and applications. 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. (see pp.91-92).
Spector, P. E. (1992). Summated Rating Scale Construction: an introduction. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. (see p.22).
2) Outer loading usually is standardized (like correlations between LV and its reflective indicators), for this reason, it is not expected that its value be greater than 1.
If you are using formative indicators, the outer weights could have values greater than 1 because the multicollinearity between them.
Best regards,
Bido
- Diogenes
- PLS Super-Expert
- Posts: 899
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:13 pm
- Real name and title:
- Location: São Paulo - BRAZIL
- Contact:
Hi,
A classical reference about this:
LIKERT, Rensis. 1932. A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, n.140, pp.1-50.
That was republished in Spanish in 1976:
WAINERMAN. C. H. (compil.). 1976. Escalas de medición em ciências sociales. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Nueva Visión. pp.199-260.
He recommends the inversion of the scale when the item-total correlation is negative (p252).
Best regards,
Bido
A classical reference about this:
LIKERT, Rensis. 1932. A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, n.140, pp.1-50.
That was republished in Spanish in 1976:
WAINERMAN. C. H. (compil.). 1976. Escalas de medición em ciências sociales. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Nueva Visión. pp.199-260.
He recommends the inversion of the scale when the item-total correlation is negative (p252).
Best regards,
Bido
Hi, Professor Diogenes Bido,Diogenes wrote:Hi Miguel,
It is recommended 0,7 because 0,7^2 = 0,49
49% (almost 50%) of the variance of the indicator is explained by its LV.
Remenbering that AVE also should be > 50% (all loading = 0,7; the AVE will be 49%).
In practical cases we have some indicators lower than 0,7, but others bigger than 0,7, with AVE > 0,5;
in this case is common to keep the indicator even when its loading < 0,7, mainly in cases where we have just 3 or 4 indicators.
Best regards.
Bido
Since, i'm not good at statistic. now i know the standard and i wanna know about others like AVE and T-value's Standard. And from where that i can get the reference about support such loading is acceptable. can professor give me some reference paper. thank you
Best regards
Melvin
-
- PLS Senior User
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:38 am
- Real name and title: