Browse > Article

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

Kim, Jong-Ki (Division of Management, College of Business, Pusan National University)
Jeon, Jin-Hwan (Institute of Management and Economics, Pusan National University)
Publication Information
Asia pacific journal of information systems / v.19, no.4, 2009 , pp. 47-75 More about this Journal
Abstract
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.
Keywords
Management Information Systems; Structural Equation Model; Meta Analysis;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Bagozzi, R.P. and Fornell, C., 'Theoretical Concepts, Measurement, and Meaning,' A Second Generation of Multivariate Analysis, Vol. 2, 1982, pp. 5-23
2 Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y.J., 'On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models,' Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1988, pp. 74-97   DOI
3 Bollen, K.A., Structural Equations with latent variables, John Wiley and Sons, 1989
4 Browne, M.W., 'Asymptotically Distribution Free Methods for the Analysis for Covariance Structures,' British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, Vol. 37, 1984, pp. 62-83   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Chin, W.W., 'Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling,' MIS Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 1, 1998, pp. 7-16
6 Chin, W.W. and Newsted, P.R., 'Structural Equation Modeling Analysis with Small Samples Using Partial Least Squares,' in Statistical Strategies for Small Sample Research, R.H. Hoyle(Eds.), Sage, 1999, pp. 307-341
7 Cliff, N., 'Some Cautions Concerning the Application of Causal Modeling Methods,' Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 18, 1983, pp. 115-126   DOI
8 Gefen, D., Straub, D.W., and Boudreau, M.C., 'Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice,' Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 4, No. 7, 2000, pp. 1-75
9 Hoyle, R.H. and Panter, A.T., Writing about Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications, Sage, 1995
10 Kim, J.H., Hong, S.H., and Choo, B.D., 'Applications of Structural Equation Modeling in Management Studies: A Critical Review,' Korean Management Review, Vol. 36, No. 4, 2007, pp. 897-923
11 Kim, J.K., Lim, H.S., and Lee, D.H., 'A Meta-Analysis of Reliability and Validity of Research Instruments in Korean MIS Research,' Asia Pacific Journal of International Systems, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2001, pp. 81-98
12 Lee, S.M., Analysis of Covariance Structural Modeling, Sung Won Sa, 1990
13 MacCallum, R.C. and Austin, J.T., 'Applications of Structural Equation Modeling in Psychological Research,' Annual Reviews of Psychology, Vol. 51, No.1, 2000, pp. 201-226   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Segars, A.H. and Grover, V., 'Re-Examining Perceived Ease of Use and Usefulness: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis,' MIS Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 4, 1993, pp. 517-525   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Steenkamp, J.E. and Baumgartner, H., 'On the Use of Structural Equation Models for Marketing Modeling,' International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2000, pp. 195-202   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Shah, R. and Goldstein, S.M., 'Use of Structural Equation Modeling in Operations Management Research: Looking Back and Forward,' Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2006, pp. 148-169   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Shook, C.L., David, J.K., Hult, G.T., and Kacmar, K.M., 'An Assessment of the Use of Structural Equation Modeling in Strategic Management Research,' Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25, No. 4, 2004, pp. 397-404   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Arbuckle, J.L., AMOS Users Guide Version 3.6, Small Waters Co., 1997
19 Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W., 'Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach,' Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103, No. 4, 1988, pp. 411-423   DOI
20 Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A., 'The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,' Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 6, 1986, pp. 1173-1182   DOI   PUBMED
21 Marsh H.W. and Hau, K.T., 'Assessing Goodness of Fit: Is Parsimony Always Desirable?' Journal Experimental Education, Vol. 64, 1996, pp. 364-390   DOI
22 Cudeck, R., 'Analysis of Correlation Matrics Using Covariance Structure Models,' Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 105, No. 2, 1989, pp. 317-327   DOI
23 Straub, D.W., 'Validating Instruments in MIS Research,' MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1989, pp. 147-169   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Hayduck, L.A., Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL: Essentials and Advances, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987
25 Fornell, C. and Cha, J.S., 'Partial Least Squares,' in Advanced Methods of Marketing, R.P. Bagozzi(Eds.), Oxford, Blackwell Publishers, 1994, pp. 52-78
26 Petter, S., Straub, D.W., and Rai, A., 'Specifying Formative Constructs in Information Systems Research,' MIS Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 3, 2007, pp. 623-656   DOI
27 Swanson, E.B. and Ramiller, N.C., 'Information Systems Research Thematics: Submissions to a New Journal, 1987-1992,' Information Systems Research, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 299-330   DOI
28 Chin, W.W., 'The Partial Least Squares Approach for Structural Equation Modeling,' in Modern Methods for Business Research, G.A. Marcoulides(Eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998, pp. 295-336
29 McDonald, R.P. and Ho, M.R., 'Principles and Practice in Reporting Structural Equation Analyses,' Psychological Methods, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2002, pp. 64-82   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Brekler, S.J., 'Applications of Covariance Structure Modeling in Psychology: Cause for Concern?,' Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 107, 1990, pp. 260-273   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
31 MacCallum, R.C., Brwone, M.W., and Sugawara, H.M., 'Power Analysis and Determination of Sample Size for Covariance Structural Modeling,' Psychological Methods, Vol. 1, 1996, pp. 130-149   DOI
32 Benbasat, I. and Weber, R., 'Research Commentary: Rethinking ‘Diversity’ in Information Systems Research,' Information Systems Research, Vol. 7, No. 4, 1996, pp. 389-399   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Segars, A.H., 'Assessing the Unidimensionality of Measurement: A Paradigm and Illustration Within the Context of Information Systems,' Omega, Vol. 25, No. 1, 1997, pp. 107-121   DOI   ScienceOn
34 Bentler, P.M. and Chou, C.P., 'Practical Issues in Structural Modeling,' Sociological Methods and Research, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1987, pp. 78-117   DOI
35 Bentler, P.M., 'Comparative Fit Indexes in Structural Models,' Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 107, No. 2, 1990, pp. 238-246   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
36 Fornell, C. and Bookstein, F.L., 'Two Structural Equation Models: Lisrel and PLS Applied to Consumer Exit-Voice Theory,' Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19, No. 4, 1982, pp. 440-452   DOI   ScienceOn
37 Bae, B.R., Structural Equation Modeling-Understanding, Applications, and Programming (2nd Eds.), ChoungRam, 2006
38 Bentler, P.M. and Bonnet, D.G., 'Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structure,' Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 88, No. 3, 1980, pp. 588-606   DOI
39 Holbert, R.L. and Stephenson, M.T., 'Structural Equation Modeling in the Communication Sciences,' Human Communication Research, Vol. 28, No. 4, 2002, pp. 531-551
40 Kang, S.C., 'A Critical Evaluation of the Use of Statistical Methods in an MIS Journal,' Asia Pacific Journal of International Systems, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1997, pp. 77-102
41 Browne, M.W. and Cudeck, R., 'Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit,' Sociological Methods and Research, Vol. 21, No. 2, 1992, pp. 230-258   DOI   ScienceOn
42 Hoogland, J.J. and Boomsma, A., 'Robustness Studies in Covariance Structure Modeling: An Overview and a Meta-Analysis,' Sociological Methods and Research, Vol. 26, No. 3, 1998, pp. 329-367   DOI   ScienceOn
43 Joreskog, K.G. and Sorbom, D., Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS Command Language, Scientific Software International, 1993
44 Baroudi, J.J. and Orlikowski, W.J., 'The Problems of Statistical Power in MIS Research,' MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 1, 1989, pp. 87-106   DOI   ScienceOn
45 Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F., 'Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error,' Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18, No. 1, 1981, pp. 39-50   DOI   ScienceOn
46 Park H.S., 'Research Trends on International Journal of Tourism Sciences with SEM,' Journal of Tourism Sciences, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 267-286
47 Banvile, C. and Landry, M., 'Can the Field of MIS be Disciplined?,' Communication of th ACM, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 48-60   DOI   ScienceOn
48 Baumgartner, H. and Homburg, C., 'Ap plications of Structural Equation Modeling in Marketing and Consumer Research: A Review,' International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1996, pp. 139-161   DOI   ScienceOn
49 Lee, B.T., Baura, A., and Whinston, A.B., 'Discovery and Representation of Causal Relationship in MIS Research: A Methodological Framework,' MIS Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 1, 1997, pp. 109-136   DOI   ScienceOn
50 Garver, M.S. and Mentzer, J.T., 'Logistics Research Methods: Employing Structural Equation Modeling to Test for Construct Validity,' Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 20, No. 1, 1999, pp. 33-57
51 Emery, J.C. and Sprague, C.R., 'MIS: Mirage or Misconception,' Harvard Business Review, Vol. 50, No. 3, 1972, pp. 22-23
52 McDonald, R.P., Path Analysis with Composite Variables, Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 31, No. 2, 1996, pp 239-270   DOI   ScienceOn
53 Rigdon, E.E., 'A Necessary and Sufficient Identification Rule for Structural Models Estimated in Practice,' Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 30, No. 3, 1995, pp. 359-383   DOI   ScienceOn
54 Bagozzi, R.P. and Baumgartner, H., 'The Evaluation of Structural Equation Models and Hypothesis Testing,' Principles of Marketing Research, 1994, pp. 386-422
55 MacKinnon, D.P., 'Contrasts in Multiple Mediator Models,' in Multivariate Applications in Substance Use Research: New Methods for New Questions, J.S. Rose and L. Chassin(Eds.), Erlbaum, 2000, pp. 141-160
56 Chin, W.W. and Todd, P.A., 'On the Use, Usefulness, and Ease of Use of Structural Equation Modeling in MIS Research: A Note of Caution,' MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1999, pp. 237-246   DOI   ScienceOn
57 Hayduck, L.A., Cummings, G.G., Boadu, K., Pazderka-Robinson, H., and Boulianne, S., 'Testing! testing! one, two, three-Testing the theory in structural equation models!,' Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 42, No. 5, 2007, pp. 841-850   DOI   ScienceOn
58 Kelloway, E.K., Using LISREL for Structural Equation Modeling: A Researcher's Guide, Sage, 1998
59 Kang, S.C., Lee, Z.K., and Choi, J.I., 'Application of Empirical Research Methods in Information Systems Research: Gaining Lessons Through Evaluation,' Asia Pacific Journal of International Systems, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2006, pp. 1-25
60 Carmines, E. and McIver, J., Analyzing Models with Unobserved Variables: Analysis of Covariance Structures, Social Management: Current Issues, Sage, 1981
61 Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M., 'Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives,' Structural Equation Modeling, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1999, pp. 1-55   DOI   ScienceOn
62 Bohrnstedt, G.W. and Knoke, D., Statics of Social Data Analysis, Peacock Publishers, 1994
63 Chou, C.P. and Bentler, P.M., Estimates and Tests in Structural Equation Modeling, Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications, Sage, 1995
64 Long, J.S., Covariance Structure Models: An Introduction to LISREL, Sage, 1983
65 Tanaka, J.S., 'How Big is Big Enough? Sample Size and Goodness of Fit in Structural Equation Models with Latent Variables,' Child Development, Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 134-146   DOI   ScienceOn
66 Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L.,and Black, W.C., Multivariate Data Analysis(5th Eds.), Prentice Hall, 1998
67 Bollen, K.A. and Long, J.S., Testing Structural Equation Models, Sage, 1993
68 Gefen, D., 'Assessing Unidimensionality through LISREL: An Explanation and Example,' Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 12, 2003, pp. 23-47
69 Joreskog, K.G. and Sorbom, D., LISREL8: Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS command language, Scientific Software International, 1996
70 Dearden, J., 'MIS is a Mirage,' Harvard Business Review, Vol. 50, No. 1, 1972, pp. 90-99