A Meta Analysis of Using Structural Equation Model on the Korean MIS Research

국내 MIS 연구에서 구조방정식모형 활용에 관한 메타분석

Recently, researches on Management Information Systems (MIS) have laid out theoretical foundation and academic paradigms by introducing diverse theories, themes, and methodologies. Especially, academic paradigms of MIS encourage a user-friendly approach by developing the technologies from the users' perspectives, which reflects the existence of strong causal relationships between information systems and user's behavior. As in other areas in social science the use of structural equation modeling (SEM) has rapidly increased in recent years especially in the MIS area. The SEM technique is important because it provides powerful ways to address key IS research problems. It also has a unique ability to simultaneously examine a series of casual relationships while analyzing multiple independent and dependent variables all at the same time. In spite of providing many benefits to the MIS researchers, there are some potential pitfalls with the analytical technique. The research objective of this study is to provide some guidelines for an appropriate use of SEM based on the assessment of current practice of using SEM in the MIS research. This study focuses on several statistical issues related to the use of SEM in the MIS research. Selected articles are assessed in three parts through the meta analysis. The first part is related to the initial specification of theoretical model of interest. The second is about data screening prior to model estimation and testing. And the last part concerns estimation and testing of theoretical models based on empirical data. This study reviewed the use of SEM in 164 empirical research articles published in four major MIS journals in Korea (APJIS, ISR, JIS and JITAM) from 1991 to 2007. APJIS, ISR, JIS and JITAM accounted for 73, 17, 58, and 16 of the total number of applications, respectively. The number of published applications has been increased over time. LISREL was the most frequently used SEM software among MIS researchers (97 studies (59.15%)), followed by AMOS (45 studies (27.44%)). In the first part, regarding issues related to the initial specification of theoretical model of interest, all of the studies have used cross-sectional data. The studies that use cross-sectional data may be able to better explain their structural model as a set of relationships. Most of SEM studies, meanwhile, have employed. confirmatory-type analysis (146 articles (89%)). For the model specification issue about model formulation, 159 (96.9%) of the studies were the full structural equation model. For only 5 researches, SEM was used for the measurement model with a set of observed variables. The average sample size for all models was 365.41, with some models retaining a sample as small as 50 and as large as 500. The second part of the issue is related to data screening prior to model estimation and testing. Data screening is important for researchers particularly in defining how they deal with missing values. Overall, discussion of data screening was reported in 118 (71.95%) of the studies while there was no study discussing evidence of multivariate normality for the models. On the third part, issues related to the estimation and testing of theoretical models on empirical data, assessing model fit is one of most important issues because it provides adequate statistical power for research models. There were multiple fit indices used in the SEM applications. The test was reported in the most of studies (146 (89%)), whereas normed-test was reported less frequently (65 studies (39.64%)). It is important that normed- of 3 or lower is required for adequate model fit. The most popular model fit indices were GFI (109 (66.46%)), AGFI (84 (51.22%)), NFI (44 (47.56%)), RMR (42 (25.61%)), CFI (59 (35.98%)), RMSEA (62 (37.80)), and NNFI (48 (29.27%)). Regarding the test of construct validity, convergent validity has been examined in 109 studies (66.46%) and discriminant validity in 98 (59.76%). 81 studies (49.39%) have reported the average variance extracted (AVE). However, there was little discussion of direct (47 (28.66%)), indirect, and total effect in the SEM models. Based on these findings, we suggest general guidelines for the use of SEM and propose some recommendations on concerning issues of latent variables models, raw data, sample size, data screening, reporting parameter estimated, model fit statistics, multivariate normality, confirmatory factor analysis, reliabilities and the decomposition of effects.