The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An assessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic management research
Abstract
Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a powerful, yet complex, analytical technique. The use of SEM to examine strategic management phenomena has increased dramatically in recent years, suggesting that a critical evaluation of the technique's implementation is needed. We compared the use of SEM in 92 strategic management studies published in nine prominent journals from 1984 to 2002 to guidelines culled from methodological research. We found that the use and reporting of SEM often have been less than ideal, indicating that authors may be drawing erroneous conclusions about relationships among variables. Given these results, we offer suggestions for researchers on how to better deploy SEM within future inquiry. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151312 · Cited by 109,314
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
Representing and Testing Organizational Theories: A Holistic Construal
Bagozzi, R. P., & Phillips, L. W. (1982) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392322 · Cited by 2,064
Structural equation modelling in perspective
Kelloway, E. K. (1995) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.4030160304 · Cited by 495
Cited by
A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 · Cited by 38,459
An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6 · Cited by 8,088
Bootstrapping and PLS-SEM: A step-by-step guide to get more out of your bootstrap results
Streukens, S., & Leroi-Werelds, S. (2016) · European Management Journal · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2016.06.003 · Cited by 1,120
Partial Least Squares: The Better Approach to Structural Equation Modeling?
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2012) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2012.09.011 · Cited by 855
Lin, Y., & Wu, L.-Y. (2014) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.12.019 · Cited by 783
Metadata
- Authors
- Shook, C. L., Ketchen, D. J., Hult, G. T. M., & Kacmar, K. M.
- Venue
- Strategic Management Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-02-24
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 397-404
- ISSN
- 0143-2095 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0266
- OpenAlex
- W1975468930
- Cited by
- 816
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 26.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An assessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic management research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/smj.385
- The paper
- Shook, C. L., Ketchen, D. J., Hult, G. T. M., & Kacmar, K. M. (2004). An assessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic management research. Strategic Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.385
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
