Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement
Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.013
复制
发表时间：
2008-12-01
影响因子：
11.3
通讯作者：
Venaik, Sunil
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Coltman, Tim;Devinney, Timothy M.;Venaik, Sunil
本文提出了一个框架，帮助研究人员设计和验证形成性和反思性测量模型。该框架借鉴了现有文献，包括理论和实证考虑。两个重要的例子，一个来自国际商务，一个来自营销，说明了该框架的用途。这两个例子都涉及这些学科理论构建的基础建构，并且是大多数学者反思性衡量的建构。相反，应用该框架表明形成性测量模型可能更合适。这些结果强调了所有研究人员需要从理论上和经验上证明他们选择的测量模型的合理性。使用不正确的测量模型会破坏结构的内容有效性，歪曲它们之间的结构关系，并最终降低管理理论对商业研究人员和实践者的有用性。本文的主要贡献是对许多商业文献中常见的反思性测量的不假思索的假设提出质疑。 (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. 保留所有权利。
This paper presents a framework that helps researchers to design and validate both formative and reflective measurement models. The framework draws from the existing literature and includes both theoretical and empirical considerations. Two important examples, one from international business and one from marketing, illustrate the use of the framework. Both examples concern constructs that are fundamental to theory-building in these disciplines, and constructs that most scholars measure reflectively. In contrast, applying the framework suggests that a formative measurement model may be more appropriate. These results reinforce the need for all researchers to justify, both theoretically and empirically, their choice of measurement model. Use of an incorrect measurement model undermines the content validity of constructs, misrepresents the structural relationships between them, and ultimately lowers the usefulness of management theories for business researchers and practitioners. The main contribution of this paper is to question the unthinking assumption of reflective measurement seen in much of the business literature. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.