Partial least squares path modeling (PLS) has been increasing in popularity as a form of or an alternative to structural equation modeling (SEM) and has currently considerable momentum in some management disciplines. Despite recent criticism toward the method, most existing studies analyzing the performance of PLS have reached positive conclusions. This article shows that most of the evidence for the usefulness of the method has been a misinterpretation. The analysis presented shows that PLS amplifies the effects of chance correlations in a unique way and this effect explains prior simulations results better than the previous interpretations. It is unlikely that a researcher would willingly amplify error, and therefore the results show that the usefulness of the PLS method is a fallacy. There are much better ways to compensate for the attenuation effect caused by using latent variable scores to estimate SEM models than creating a bias into the opposite direction.
Aguirre-UrretaM. I.MarakasG.EllisM.SunW. (2008). A Monte Carlo investigation of partial least squares, with implications for both structural and measurement models. AMCIS 2008 Proceedings. Retrieved fromhttp://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2008/246/
3.
BentlerP. M.HuangW. (2014). On components, latent variables, PLS and simple methods: Reactions to Ridgon’s rethinking of PLS. Long Range Planning.
4.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: John Wiley & Son Inc.
5.
CasselC. M.HacklP.WestlundA. H. (2000). On measurement of intangible assets: A study of robustness of partial least squares. Total Quality Management, 11(7), 897–907. doi:10.1080/09544120050135443
6.
CharlesE. P. (2005). The correction for attenuation due to measurement error: Clarifying concepts and creating confidence sets. Psychological Methods, 10(2), 206–226. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.10.2.206
7.
ChinW. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In MarcoulidesG. A. (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295–336). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
8.
ChinW. W. (2010). Bootstrap cross-validation indices for PLS path model assessment. In VinziE. V.ChinW. W.HenselerJ.WangH. (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 83–97). New York: Springer.
9.
ChinW. W.MarcolinB. L.NewstedP. 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 Systems Research, 14(2), 189–217.
10.
ChinW. W.NewstedP. R. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. In HoyleR. H. (Ed.), Statistical strategies for small sample research (pp. 307–342). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
11.
CiavolinoE.Al-NasserA. D. (2009). Comparing generalised maximum entropy and partial least squares methods for structural equation models. Journal of Nonparametric Statistics, 21(8), 1017–1036. doi:10.1080/10485250903009037
12.
CohenJ.CohenP.WestS. G.AikenL. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13.
DijkstraT. K. (1981). Latent variables in linear stochastic models: Reflection on “maximum likelihood” and “partial least squares” methods (Doctoral dissertation). Rijksuniversiteit te Groningen.
14.
DijkstraT. K. (2010). Latent variables and indices: Herman Wold’s basic design and partial least squares. In VinziE. V.ChinW. W.HenselerJ.WangH. (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 23–46). New York: Spinger.
15.
DijkstraT. K. (2014). PLS’ Janus face. Long Range Planning. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2014.02.004
DijkstraT. K.Schermelleh-EngelK. (2013). Consistent partial least squares for nonlinear structural equation models. Psychometrika. doi:10.1007/s11336-013-9370-0
18.
GefenD.RigdonE. E.StraubD. (2011). An update and extension to SEM guidelines for administrative and social science research. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), iii–A7.
19.
GlassG. V.MaguireT. O. (1966). Abuses of factor scores. American Educational Research Journal, 3(4), 297–304. doi:10.2307/1162038
20.
GoodhueD. L.LewisW.ThompsonR. (2007). Statistical power in analyzing interaction effects: Questioning the advantage of PLS with product indicators. Information Systems Research, 18(2), 211–227.
21.
GoodhueD. L.LewisW.ThompsonR. (2012a). Comparing Pls to regression and Lisrel: A response to Marcoulides, Chin, and Saunders. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 703–A10.
22.
GoodhueD. L.LewisW.ThompsonR. (2012b). Does PLS have advantages for small sample size or non-normal data. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 981–1001.
23.
HairJ. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
24.
HairJ. F.RingleC. M.SarstedtM. (2012). Partial least squares: The better approach to structural equation modeling?Long Range Planning, 45(5-6), 312–319. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2012.09.011
25.
HairJ. F.SarstedtM.RingleC. M.MenaJ. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414–433. doi:10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6
26.
HardinA.MarcoulidesG. A. (2011). A commentary on the use of formative measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71(5), 753–764. doi:10.1177/0013164411414270
27.
HenselerJ.ChinW. W. (2010). A comparison of approaches for the analysis of interaction effects between latent variables using partial least squares path modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 17(1), 82–109. doi:10.1080/10705510903439003
28.
HenselerJ.DijkstraT.SarstedtM.RingleC.DiamantopoulosA.StraubD.
…
CalantoneR. (2014). Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on Rönkkö & Evermann (2013). Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), 182–209.
29.
HwangH.MalhotraN. K.KimY.TomiukM. A.HongS. (2010). A comparative study on parameter recovery of three approaches to structural equation modeling. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 47(4), 699–712. doi:10.1509/jmkr.47.4.699
30.
KlineR. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
31.
LeH.SchmidtF. L.PutkaD. J. (2009). The multifaceted nature of measurement artifacts and its implications for estimating construct-level relationships. Organizational Research Methods, 12(1), 165–200. doi:10.1177/1094428107302900
32.
LehmannE.CasellaG. (1998). Theory of point estimation. New York, NY: Springer.
33.
LiangH.SarafN.HuQ.XueY. (2007). Assimilation of enterprise systems: The effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 59–87.
34.
LohmöllerJ. B. (1989). Latent Variable Path Modeling With Partial Least Squares. New York, NY: Physica-Verlag.
35.
LuI. R. R.KwanE.ThomasD. R.CedzynskiM. (2011). Two new methods for estimating structural equation models: An illustration and a comparison with two established methods. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 28(3), 258–268. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2011.03.006
36.
LuI. R. R.ThomasD. R. (2008). Avoiding and correcting bias in score-based latent variable regression with discrete manifest items. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 15(3), 462–490. doi:10.1080/10705510802154323
37.
MarcoulidesG. A.ChinW. W.SaundersC. (2012). When imprecise statistical statements become problematic: A response to Goodhue, Lewis, and Thompson. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 717–728.
38.
McIntoshC. N.EdwardsJ. R.AntonakisJ.Reflections on partial least squares path modeling. Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), 210–251.
39.
MosierC. I. (1943). On the reliability of a weighted composite. Psychometrika, 8(3), 161–168. doi:10.1007/BF02288700
40.
MuchinskyP. M. (1996). The correction for attenuation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(1), 63–75. doi:10.1177/0013164496056001004
41.
NoonanR.WoldH. (1982). PLS path modeling with indirectly observed variables. In JoüreskogK.WoldS. (Eds.), Systems under indirect observation: Causality, structure, prediction. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
42.
NunnallyJ. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
43.
PengD. X.LaiF. (2012). Using partial least squares in operations management research: A practical guideline and summary of past research. Journal of Operations Management, 30(6), 467–480. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2012.06.002
44.
QureshiI.CompeauD. (2009). Assessing between-group differences in information systems research: A comparison of covariance- and component-based SEM. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 197–214.
45.
R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved fromhttp://www.R-project.org/
ReinartzW. J.HaenleinM.HenselerJ. (2009). An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(4), 332–344. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2009.08.001
48.
RigdonE. E. (2013). Partial least squares path modeling. In HancockG. R.MuellerR. O. (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
49.
RingleC. M.SarstedtM.StraubD. W. (2012). A critical look at the use of PLS-SEM in MIS Quarterly. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), iii–xiv.
RönkköM.EvermannJ. (2013). A critical examination of common beliefs about partial least squares path modeling. Organizational Research Methods, 16(3), 425–448. doi:10.1177/1094428112474693
52.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.
SavaleiV.BentlerP. M. (2007). Structural equation modeling. In GroverR.VriensM. (Eds.), The handbook of marketing research: Uses, misuses, and future advances (pp. 330–364). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
55.
Schermelleh-EngelK.WernerC. S.KleinA. G.MoosbruggerH. (2010). Nonlinear structural equation modeling: Is partial least squares an alternative?Asta-Advances in Statistical Analysis, 94(2), 167–184. doi:10.1007/s10182-010-0132-3
TreiblmaierH.BentlerP. M.MairP. (2011). Formative constructs implemented via common factors. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18(1), 1–17. doi:10.1080/10705511.2011.532693
58.
WoldH. (1982). Soft modeling—The basic design and some extensions. In JöreskogK. G.WoldS. (Eds.), Systems under indirect observation: Causality, structure, prediction (pp. 1–54). Amsterdam, NY: North-Holland.
59.
ZimmermanD. W. (2007). Correction for attenuation with biased reliability estimates and correlated errors in populations and samples. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(6), 920–939. doi:10.1177/0013164406299132
60.
ZimmermanD. W.WilliamsR. H. (1997). Properties of the Spearman correction for attenuation for normal and realistic non-normal distributions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(3), 253–270. doi:10.1177/01466216970213005
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
