Hello Community,
does somebody knows, what's the different between DEV and Communality (both are reported in Quality-Criteria Overview)?
Thanks you for your comments.
Difference between DEV and Communality?
- cringle
- SmartPLS Developer
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 9:13 am
- Real name and title: Prof. Dr. Christian M. Ringle
- Location: Hamburg (Germany)
- Contact:
Please check the following article that you already can find in the "PLS Related Literature"-section of this forum
viewforum.php?f=7
author = Tenenhaus, Michel / Vinzi, Vincenzo E. / Chatelin, Yves-Marie / Lauro, Carlo
title = PLS path modeling
journal = Computational Statistics & Data Analysis
year = 2005
volume = 48
pages = 159-205
viewforum.php?f=7
author = Tenenhaus, Michel / Vinzi, Vincenzo E. / Chatelin, Yves-Marie / Lauro, Carlo
title = PLS path modeling
journal = Computational Statistics & Data Analysis
year = 2005
volume = 48
pages = 159-205
Prof. Dr. Christian M. Ringle, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), SmartPLS
- Literature on PLS-SEM: https://www.smartpls.com/documentation
- Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?use ... AAAJ&hl=de
- Literature on PLS-SEM: https://www.smartpls.com/documentation
- Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?use ... AAAJ&hl=de
- Diogenes
- PLS Super-Expert
- Posts: 899
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:13 pm
- Real name and title:
- Location: São Paulo - BRAZIL
- Contact:
Hi,
if we have a LV with 3 reflective MV, with these loads:
x1 ==> 0.6
x2 ==> 0.7
x3 ==> 0.8
The communalities will be:
x1 ==> 0.6^2 = 0.36 = 36% (variance of the MV explained by the LV)
x2 ==> 0.7^2 = 0.49 = 49%
x3 ==> 0.8^2 = 0.64 = 64%
The AVE will be: (0.36+0.49+0.64)/3 = 0.49666 = 40.6% (the LV explain 40.6% of the variance from all MVs).
Best regards.
Bido
if we have a LV with 3 reflective MV, with these loads:
x1 ==> 0.6
x2 ==> 0.7
x3 ==> 0.8
The communalities will be:
x1 ==> 0.6^2 = 0.36 = 36% (variance of the MV explained by the LV)
x2 ==> 0.7^2 = 0.49 = 49%
x3 ==> 0.8^2 = 0.64 = 64%
The AVE will be: (0.36+0.49+0.64)/3 = 0.49666 = 40.6% (the LV explain 40.6% of the variance from all MVs).
Best regards.
Bido
Dear Prof. de Souza Bido,
Thank you so much for your explanations. They are very helpful.
You wrote:
The AVE will be: (0.36+0.49+0.64)/3 = 0.49666 = 40.6% (the LV explain 40.6% of the variance from all MVs).
This is exactly the same formula for communality (used in Tenenhaus et al. 2005). For a latent reflective construct, AVE = communality. I am confused, because AVE as well as communality is reported in SmartPLS 2.0M3.
Is there any reason why there are reported twice? I am thinking, communality is enough.
Thanks you so much.
Thank you so much for your explanations. They are very helpful.
You wrote:
The AVE will be: (0.36+0.49+0.64)/3 = 0.49666 = 40.6% (the LV explain 40.6% of the variance from all MVs).
This is exactly the same formula for communality (used in Tenenhaus et al. 2005). For a latent reflective construct, AVE = communality. I am confused, because AVE as well as communality is reported in SmartPLS 2.0M3.
Is there any reason why there are reported twice? I am thinking, communality is enough.
Thanks you so much.
- Diogenes
- PLS Super-Expert
- Posts: 899
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:13 pm
- Real name and title:
- Location: São Paulo - BRAZIL
- Contact:
Hi,
We use communality to assess how much one indicator is explained by the LV, there is a recomendation that communality shoud be greater than 0.5 for each indicator (individually).
The AVE is used to assess the LV like we do in factor analysis: if we really have a common factor, it shoud explain more than 50% of the total variance of the indicators.
Eventually, We have one communality by indicator and one AVE by LV.
Best regardss.
Bido
We use communality to assess how much one indicator is explained by the LV, there is a recomendation that communality shoud be greater than 0.5 for each indicator (individually).
The AVE is used to assess the LV like we do in factor analysis: if we really have a common factor, it shoud explain more than 50% of the total variance of the indicators.
Eventually, We have one communality by indicator and one AVE by LV.
Best regardss.
Bido
Re: Difference between DEV and Communality?
Hello Pr Bido
I have a question on the same subject. In a first model I have a variable :
A second order
B first order (outer loading = 0.463)
C first order (outer loading = - 0.551)
D first order (outer loading =0.932)
I'd like to transform variable A into a third-order construct (reflective), integrate variables C and D into a second-order construct called E and keep variable D as a first-order variable.
Please suggest a formula for calculating the outer loading of E with A from the results obtained from the initial specification.
Here's a graphical representation of the transformation I want to perform:
Initial specification
B
C > A
D
New specification
D
>> A
E
Best regards.
I have a question on the same subject. In a first model I have a variable :
A second order
B first order (outer loading = 0.463)
C first order (outer loading = - 0.551)
D first order (outer loading =0.932)
I'd like to transform variable A into a third-order construct (reflective), integrate variables C and D into a second-order construct called E and keep variable D as a first-order variable.
Please suggest a formula for calculating the outer loading of E with A from the results obtained from the initial specification.
Here's a graphical representation of the transformation I want to perform:
Initial specification
B
C > A
D
New specification
D
>> A
E
Best regards.