Hello
Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2020 4:25 am
Hi all,
I am at present examining a model where my exogenous variable is type II intelligent developmental build. The HOC has three developmental measurements (3 LOCs) which are exclusively estimated by intelligent things. The intelligent things of each LOC are not equivalent so I am slanted to utilize the two-stage model. I am not ready to append the graph so here is the clarification of the model
My HOC is endogenous that is associated with Y1 and Y2, while Y1 is the arbiter among HOC and Y2. The connection between HOC and Y1 is being directed by M.
I have three inquiries
1. I comprehend that for the two-phase model, I model the associations with LOCs just. for example, all the three LOCs have connections to the Y1 and the Y2 and HOC isn't in the underlying model. At that point compute the idle variable scores for the three LOCs and put them in as developmental things for the HOC in the subsequent stage (following Becker et al 2012, Figure B3). My inquiry is when and how to incorporate the arbitrator. Should that be just remembered for the subsequent stage or am I to incorporate three mediator bolts to three LOC connections to Y1 in the primary stage as well (the inert variable count stage)?
2. Likewise I comprehend that I need to utilize Mode A for the principal stage figuring however for the inactive variable relationship to HOC at second stage I should utilize Mode B as this is developmental. Is this right? Besides, is way model setting fine for all estimations?
3. As my exogenous variable is an intelligent developmental build, is it important to utilize the two-stage way to deal with control? Hair et al (2017) prescribe utilizing a two-stage way to deal with control if the mediator or exogenous variable is developmental? In any case, I have seen different recordings and so forth that express that item marker is better and should be utilized. Any experiences on both these issues will be extremely useful.
Anticipating your assistance.
Much obliged ahead of time
I am at present examining a model where my exogenous variable is type II intelligent developmental build. The HOC has three developmental measurements (3 LOCs) which are exclusively estimated by intelligent things. The intelligent things of each LOC are not equivalent so I am slanted to utilize the two-stage model. I am not ready to append the graph so here is the clarification of the model
My HOC is endogenous that is associated with Y1 and Y2, while Y1 is the arbiter among HOC and Y2. The connection between HOC and Y1 is being directed by M.
I have three inquiries
1. I comprehend that for the two-phase model, I model the associations with LOCs just. for example, all the three LOCs have connections to the Y1 and the Y2 and HOC isn't in the underlying model. At that point compute the idle variable scores for the three LOCs and put them in as developmental things for the HOC in the subsequent stage (following Becker et al 2012, Figure B3). My inquiry is when and how to incorporate the arbitrator. Should that be just remembered for the subsequent stage or am I to incorporate three mediator bolts to three LOC connections to Y1 in the primary stage as well (the inert variable count stage)?
2. Likewise I comprehend that I need to utilize Mode A for the principal stage figuring however for the inactive variable relationship to HOC at second stage I should utilize Mode B as this is developmental. Is this right? Besides, is way model setting fine for all estimations?
3. As my exogenous variable is an intelligent developmental build, is it important to utilize the two-stage way to deal with control? Hair et al (2017) prescribe utilizing a two-stage way to deal with control if the mediator or exogenous variable is developmental? In any case, I have seen different recordings and so forth that express that item marker is better and should be utilized. Any experiences on both these issues will be extremely useful.
Anticipating your assistance.
Much obliged ahead of time