Formative Measurement Models: A Response to Bainter & Bollen (2014) and Howell (2014)

Autor/inn/en	Guyon, Hervé; Tensaout, Mouloud
Titel	Formative Measurement Models: A Response to Bainter & Bollen (2014) and Howell (2014)
Quelle	In: Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 13 (2015) 1, S.53-58 (6 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1536-6367
DOI	10.1080/15366367.2015.1016340
Schlagwörter	Stellungnahme; Causal Models; Measurement; Data Interpretation; Structural Equation Models; Monte Carlo Methods; Statistical Data + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Kausalanalyse; Messverfahren; Data evaluation; Datenauswertung; Monte-Carlo-Methode
Abstract	This article is a commentary on the Focus Article, "Interpretational Confounding or Confounded Interpretations of Causal Indicators?" and a commentary that was published in issue 12(4) 2014 of "Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspectives". The authors challenge two claims: (a) Bainter and Bollen argue that the latent variable defined by causal indicators (possessing conceptual unity) do not suffer from instability of the formative measurement model. Bainter and Bollen performed simulations to justify their claim. Guyon and Tensaout applaud Bainter and Bollen's work here because it seems that these Monte Carlo simulations are the first simulations published for the purpose of discussing the stability of formative measurement models; (b) in contrast, Howell considers that the causal indicators do not explain the meaning of the formative latent variable because this meaning "is entirely in the ys" (p. 142). (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Psychology Press. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01