首页> 外文期刊>MIS quarterly >Assessing Between-group Differences In Information Systems Research: A Comparisonof Covariance-and Component-bsed Sem
【24h】

Assessing Between-group Differences In Information Systems Research: A Comparisonof Covariance-and Component-bsed Sem

机译:评估信息系统研究中的组间差异:基于协方差和基于组件的Sem的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Multigroup or between-group analyses are common in the information systems literature. The ability to detect the presence or absence of between-group differences and accurately estimate the strength of moderating effects is important in studies that attempt to show contingent effects. In the past, IS scholars have used a variety of approaches to examine these effects, with the partial least squares (PLS) pooled significance test for multigroup becoming the most common (e.g., Ahuja and Thatcher 2005; Enns et al. 2003; Zhu et al. 2006). In other areas of social sciences (Epitropaki and Martin 2005) and management (Mayer and Gavin 2005; Song et al. 2005) research, however, there is greater emphasis on the use of covariance-basedstructural equation modeling multigroup analysis. This paper compares these two methods through Monte Carlo simulation. Our findings demonstrate the conditions under which covariance-based multigroup analysis is more appropriate as well as those under which there either is no difference or the component-based approach is preferable. In particular, we find that when data are normally distributed, with a small sample size and correlated exogenous variables, the component-based approach is more likely to detect differences between-group than is the covariance-based approach. Both approaches will consistently detect differences under conditions of normality with large sample sizes. With non-normally distributed data, neither technique could consistently detect differences across the groups in two of the paths, suggesting that both techniques struggle with the prediction of a highly skewed and kurtotic dependent variable. Both techniques detected the differences in the other paths consistently under conditions of non-normality, with the component-based approach preferable at moderate effect sizes, particularly for smaller samples.
机译:多组或组间分析在信息系统文献中很常见。在试图显示或有作用的研究中,检测组间差异是否存在以及准确估计调节作用强度的能力很重要。过去,IS学者使用多种方法来检验这些影响,其中偏最小二乘(PLS)汇总显着性检验成为多组研究最为普遍(例如Ahuja和Thatcher 2005; Enns等人2003; Zhu等人)。 (2006年)。然而,在社会科学的其他领域(Epitropaki和Martin 2005)和管理(Mayer和Gavin 2005; Song等,2005)研究中,更加强调基于协方差的结构方程模型多组分析的使用。本文通过蒙特卡洛仿真比较了这两种方法。我们的发现表明,基于协方差的多组分析更适合的条件以及不存在差异或基于组件的方法更可取的条件。特别是,我们发现,当数据呈正态分布,样本量较小且相关的外生变量相关时,基于组件的方法比基于协方差的方法更有可能检测组间差异。两种方法都将在大样本量的正常条件下一致地检测差异。对于非正态分布的数据,这两种技术都无法始终如一地检测到两条路径中各组之间的差异,这表明这两种技术都难以预测高度偏斜和峰态因变量。两种技术都在非正态条件下一致地检测到其他路径上的差异,其中基于组件的方法在中等效果尺寸下更可取,特别是对于较小的样本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号