Abstract
Partial least squares (PLS) estimates of structural equation model path coefficients are believed to produce more accurate estimates than those obtained with covariance structure analysis (CVA) using maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) when one or more of the MLE assumptions are not met. However, there exists no empirical support for this belief or for the specific conditions under which it will occur. MLE-based CVA will also break down or produce improper solutions whereas PLS will not. This study uses simulated data to estimate parameters for a model with five independent latent variables and one dependent latent variable under various assumption conditions. Data from customer satisfaction studies were used to identify the form of typical field-based survey distributions. Our results show that PLS produces more accurate path coefficients estimates when sample sizes are less than 500, independent latent variables are correlated, and measures per latent variable are less than 4. Method accuracy does not vary when the MLE multinormal distribution assumption is violated or when the data do not fit the theoretical structure very well. Both procedures are more accurate when the independent variables are uncorrelated, but MLE estimations break down more frequently under this condition, especially when combined with sample sizes of less than 100 and only two measures per latent variable.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49, 155–173.
Arbuckle, J. (1994). AMOS – Analysis of moment structures. Psychometrika, 59(1), 135–137.
Asher, H. B. (1976). Causal modeling. Beverly Hills: Sage
Bagozzi, R. P. (1977). Structural equation lModels in experimental research. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 209–226.
Bagozzi, R. P. (1980). Causal models in marketing. New York, NY: Wiley.
Bagozzi, R. P. (1982). Introduction to the special issue on causal modeling. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 403.
Bagozzi, R. P. (1984). A prospectus for theory construction in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 48, 11–29.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1989). On the use of structural equation models in experimental designs. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 271–284.
Bagozzi, R. P, & Yi, Y. (1994). Advanced topics in structural equation models. In R. P. Bagozzi (Ed.), Advanced Methods of Marketing Research (pp. 1–78). Cambridge: Blackwell Business.
Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Singh, S. (1991). On the use of structural equation models in experimental designs: two extensions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 8, 125–140.
Barclay, D. W. (1991). Interdepartmental conflict in organizational buying: the impact of the organizational context. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 145–159.
Barclay, D. W., Higgins, C. A., & Thompson, R. (1995). The partial least squares (pls) approach to causal modeling: personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology Studies, 2, 285–323.
Barroso, C., Carrión, G. C., & Roldán, J. L. (2010). Applying maximum likelihood and PLS on different sample sizes: studies on SERVQUAL model and employee behavior model. In V. Esposito Vinzi, W. Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook Partial Least Squares. Berlin: Springer.
Beardon, W. O., Sharma, S., & Teel, J. (1982). Sample size effects on chi square and other statistics used in evaluating causal models. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 425–30.
Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, California: Multivariate Software.
Boomsma, A. (1983). On the robustness of LISREL (maximum likelihood estimation) against small sample size and non-normality. Amsterdam: Sociometric Research Foundation.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research (pp. 295–336). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chin, W. W. (2001). PLS-Graph Manual Version 3.0, http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin.
Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1998). Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Statistical strategies for small sample research (pp. 307–341). Newberry Park, California: Sage.
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a monte carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information System Research, 14(2), 189–217.
Chou, C. P., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 37–55). Newberry Park, California: Sage.
Dillon, W. R., Kumar, A., & Mulani, N. (1987). Offending estimates in covariance structure analysis: comments on the causes of and solutions to heywood cases. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 126–135.
Dijkstra, T. (1983). Some comments on maximum likelihood and partial least squares methods. Journal of Econometrics, 22, 67–90.
Duncan, O. D. (1966). Path analysis sociological examples. American Journal of Sociology, 72, 1–16.
Falk, R. F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A Primer for Soft Modeling. Akron, Ohio: University of Akron Press.
Fleishman, A. I. (1978). A method for simulating non-normal distributions. Psychometrika, 43(4), 521–532.
Fornell, C. (1982). A second generation of multivariate analysis, Vol. 1, New York: Praeger.
Fornell, C. (1983). Issues in the application of covariance structure analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 443–448.
Fornell, C. (1989). The blending of theoretical and empirical knowledge in structural equations with unobservables. In H. Wold (Ed.), Theoretical Empiricism (pp. 153–173). New York: Paragon.
Fornell, C. (1992). A national customer satisfaction barometer: the swedish experience. Journal of Marketing,56, 6–21.
Fornell, C., & Cha, J. (1993). Partial least squares, Unpublished working paper. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Business School.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.
Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 440–452.
Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1987). Improper solutions in the analysis of covariance structures: their interpretability and a comparison of alternative respecifications. Psychometrika, 52, 99–111.
Goldberger, A. S. (1973). Structural equation models: an overview. In A. S. Goldberger, & O. D. Duncan (Eds.), Structural equation models in the social sciences (pp. 1–18). New York: Seminar Press.
Green, D. H., Barclay, D. W., & Ryans, A. B. (1995). Entry strategy and long-term performance: conceptualization and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing, 59(October), 1–16.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural Equation Modeling Concepts, Issues, and Applications (pp. 76–99). Newberry Park, California: Sage.
Hulland, J. S. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20, (2), 195–204.
Hulland, J. S., Chow, Y. H., & Lam, S. Y. (1996). Use of causal models in marketing research: a review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(2), 181–197.
James, L. R., Mulaik, S. A., & Brett, J. M. (1982). Causal analysis: assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Johnson, M., & Fornell, C. (1987). The nature and methodological implication of the cognitive representation of products. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 214–228.
Jöreskog, K. G. (1970). A general method for analysis of covariance structures. Biometrika, 57, 239–251.
Jöreskog, K. G. (1973). A general method for estimating a linear structural equation system. In A. S. Goldberger, & O. D. Duncan (Eds.), Structural equation models in the social sciences (pp. 85–112). New York: Seminar Press.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS Command Language. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lenk, P. (2000). Bayesian path analysis, Unpublished working paper. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Business School.
Lohmöller, J.-B. (1989). Latent variable path modeling with partial least squares. Heidelberg: Verlag.
Lohmöller, J.-B., & Wold, H. (1984). Introduction to PLS estimation of path models with latent variables, including some recent developments on mixed scales variables. In G. Melischek, K. Rosengren, & J. Stappers (Eds.), Cultural indicators: an international symposium. Wein, Germany: Sonderbruck.
MacCallum, R. C., & Austin, J. T. (2000). Applications of structural equation modeling in psychological research. Annual Review of Psychology, 202–220.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149.
Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K.-T. (1998). Confirmatory factor analysis: strategies for small sample sizes. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Statistical strategies for small-sample research (pp. 251–284). Newbury Park, California: Sage.
McArdle, J. J. (1980). Causal modeling applied to psychonomic systems simulation. Behavioral Research Methods and Instrumentation, 12, 193–209.
Plouffe, C. R., Vandenbosch, M., & Hulland, J. (2001). Intermediating technologies and multi-group adoption: a comparison of consumer and merchant adoption intentions towards a new electronic payment system. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18, 65–81.
Plouffe, C., Hulland, J. S., & Vandenbosch, M. (2001). Research Report: richness versus parsimony in modeling technology adoption decisions – understanding merchant adoption of a smart card-based payment system. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 208–222.
Qualls, W. J. (1987). Household decision behavior: the impact of husbands’ and wives’ sex role orientation. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 264–279.
Ryan, M. J., & Rayner, B. (1998). Estimating structural equation models with PLS. Paper presented at the American Marketing Association Advanced Research Techniques Forum, Keystone, CO.
Schneeweiss, H. (1990). Models with latent variables: LISREL versus PLS. Contemporary Mathematics, 112, 33–40.
Sharma, S., Durvasula, S., & Dillon W. R. (1989). Some results on the behavior of alternative covariance structure estimation procedures in the presence of non-normal data. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 214–221.
Smith, J. B., & Barclay, D. W. (1997). The effects of organizational differences and trust on the effectiveness of selling partner relationships. Journal of Marketing, 61, 3–21.
Vilares, M. J., Almeida, M. H., & Coelho, P. S. (2010). Comparison of likelihood and PLS estimators for structural equation modeling: a simulation with customer satisfaction data. In V. Esposito Vinzi, W. Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook Partial Least Squares. Berlin: Springer.
Wold, H. (1966). Nonlinear estimation by iterative least squares procedures. In F. N. David (Ed.), Festschrift for J. Neyman: Research Papers in Statistics (pp. 411–444). London: Wiley.
Wold, H. (1980). Model construction and evaluation when theoretical knowledge is scarce: theory and application of partial least squares. In J. Kmenta, & J. B. Ramsey (Eds.), Evaluation of Econometric Models. New York: Academic Press.
Wold, H. (1982). Soft modeling: the basic design and some extensions. In K. G. Joreskog, & H. Wold (Eds.), Systems Under Indirect Observations: Causality, Structure, Prediction, Part 2, (pp. 1–54). North-Holland: Amsterdam.
Wold, H. (1985). Systems analysis by partial least squares. In P. Nijkamp, L. Leitner, & N. Wrigley (Eds.), Measuring the Unmeasurable (pp. 221–251). Dordrecht, Germany: Marinus Nijhoff.
Wright, S. (1934). The method of path coefficients. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 5, 161–215.
Zinkhan, G. M., Joachimsthaler, E., & Kinnear, T. C. (1987). Individual differences and marketing decision support system usage and satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 24, 208–214.
Acknowledgements
John Hulland is Associate Professor of Marketing at the Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh. Michael J. Ryan is Professor Emeritus at the Ross School of Business, University of Michigan. Robert K. Rayner is Vice President, Market Strategies, Inc. The authors appreciate financial support for this work from the Richard Ivey School of Business, the Katz Graduate School of Business, and the Social Sciences and Humanities Council of Canada. We also appreciate the very helpful comments made on earlier versions of the paper by Michel Wedel and Fred Feinberg. Finally, we are extremely grateful for the study design and estimation assistance provided by Sungjin Hong.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hulland, J., Ryan, M.J., Rayner, R.K. (2010). Modeling Customer Satisfaction: A Comparative Performance Evaluation of Covariance Structure Analysis Versus Partial Least Squares. In: Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W., Henseler, J., Wang, H. (eds) Handbook of Partial Least Squares. Springer Handbooks of Computational Statistics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-32825-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32827-8
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)