IPMA - Include LVs with non-significant total effect ?

Frequently asked questions about PLS path modeling.
Post Reply
agalvez
PLS Expert User
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 10:17 pm
Real name and title: Alex

IPMA - Include LVs with non-significant total effect ?

Post by agalvez » Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:56 pm

Hi

When asessing structural model relationships, what happen if some LVs’ total effects (importance) are non-significant explaining the target LV? Do I have to include them in the IPMA? Does this make sense?

Another issue... Negative total effects are included in the map as "negative" or as "absolute values" ? I think I have to include them as absolute values, since the purpose is to compare their relative importance with other constructs. Is this correct?

Thank you in advance

User avatar
cringle
SmartPLS Developer
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 9:13 am
Real name and title: Prof. Dr. Christian M. Ringle
Location: Hamburg (Germany)
Contact:

Re: IPMA - Include LVs with non-significant total effect ?

Post by cringle » Wed Aug 21, 2019 4:05 pm

Insignficant total effects and negative ones (when you expect positive ones) are not reasonable for running an IPMA.

agalvez
PLS Expert User
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 10:17 pm
Real name and title: Alex

Re: IPMA - Include LVs with non-significant total effect ?

Post by agalvez » Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:37 pm

Thank you Prof. Ringle.

Then, insignificant total effects are excluded from the IPMA analysis, focusing on the significant ones.

Best regards.

Post Reply