Skip to main content

Multiple Comparison and Cross-Validation in Evaluating Structural Equation Models

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Proceedings of the 1992 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference

Abstract

This paper discusses the need for multiple comparison and cross-validation in evaluating structural equation models from the perspectives of philosophy of science, statistics, and methodology. After the issues associated with a single model test are examined, a comparison of competing models is suggested in its place. Theoretical arguments are also made for the use of cross-validation in comparing alternative models.

Over the last decade, structural equation models have been used by many marketing researchers (e.g., Fornell 1987). Nevertheless, relatively few studies have addressed the question of how structural equation models should be evaluated (cf. Bagozzi 1981; Fornell and Larcker 1981). Furthermore, many of these studies have focused mainly on the statistical problems with current modeling procedures (Bagozzi and Yi 1988). The purpose of this paper is to investigate the issues in evaluating structural equation models from a different perspective based on the principles of scientific inferences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Anderson, James C. and David W. Gerbing (1988),“Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach,” Psychological Bulletin, 103 (3), 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, Richard P. (1981), “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Errors,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (August), 375–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • —and Youjae Yi (1988), “On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16 (Spring), 74–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, Peter (1980), “Multivariate Analysis with Latent Variables: Causal Modeling,” Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 419–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassirer, E. (1972), An Essay on Man, New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliff, Norman (1983), “Some Cautions Concerning the Application of Causal Modeling Methods,” Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18 (January), 115–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooil, Bruce, Russel Winer, and David Rados (1987), “Cross-Validation for Prediction,” Journal of Marketing Research, 24 (August), 271–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copi, I. M. (1953), Introduction to Logic, New York: MacMilhan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cudeck, R. and M. Browne (1983), “Cross-validation of Covariance Structures,” Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18 (April), 147–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diaconis, P. (1983), “Theories of Data Analysis: From Magical Thinking through Classical Statistics,” Unpublished working paper, Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, Ward (1965), “Tactical Note on the Relation Between Scientific and Statistical Hypotheses,” Psychological Bulletin, 63, 400–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, Claes (1987), “A Second Generation of Multivariate Analysis: Classification of Methods and Implications for Marketing Research,” in Review of Marketing 1987, Michael Houston, ed. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association, 407–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • —and David Larcker (1981), “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Errors,” Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (February), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —and Youjae Yi (1992), “Assumptions of the Two- Step Approach to Latent Variable Modeling,” Sociological Methods & Research, 20 (February), 291–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henkel, Ramon and D. Morrison (1970), The Significance Test Controversy, Chicago, IL: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, Christian (1991), "Cross-Validation and Information Criteria in Causal Modeling," Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (May), 137–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, Karl and Dag Sörbom (1984), LISREL VI: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by the Method of Maximum Likelihood, Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Scott B., Richard J. Lutz, and George E. Belch (1986), “The Role of Attitude toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Explanations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (May), 130–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Academy of Marketing Science

About this paper

Cite this paper

Yi, Y., Nassen, K. (2015). Multiple Comparison and Cross-Validation in Evaluating Structural Equation Models. In: Crittenden, V.L. (eds) Proceedings of the 1992 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13248-8_83

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics