Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 614

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A critical look at the use of SEM in international business research

Open access
Richter, Nicole Franziska, Sinkovics, Rudolf R., Ringle, Christian M., Schlägel, Christopher·2016·International Marketing Review
DOI 10.1108/imr-04-2014-0148
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: – Structural equation modeling (SEM) has been widely used to examine complex research models in international business and marketing research. While the covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) approach is dominant, the authors argue that the field’s dynamic nature and the sometimes early stage of theory development more often require a partial least squares SEM (PLS-SEM) approach. The purpose of this paper is to critically review the application of SEM techniques in the field. Design/methodology/approach: – The authors searched six journals with an international business (and marketing) focus (Management International Review,Journal of International Business Studies,Journal of International Management,International Marketing Review,Journal of World Business,International Business Review) from 1990 to 2013. The authors reviewed all articles that apply SEM, analyzed their research objectives and methodology choices, and assessed whether the PLS-SEM papers followed the best practices outlined in the past. Findings: – Of the articles, 379 utilized CB-SEM and 45 PLS-SEM. The reasons for using PLS-SEM referred largely to sampling and data measurement issues and did not sufficiently build on the procedure’s benefits that stem from its design for predictive and exploratory purposes. Thus, the procedure’s key benefits, which might be fruitful for the theorizing process, are not being fully exploited. Furthermore, authors need to better follow best practices to truly advance theory building. Research limitations/implications: – The authors examined a subset of journals in the field and did not include general management journals that publish international business and marketing-related studies. Fur-thermore, the authors found only limited use of PLS-SEM in the journals the authors considered relevant to the study. Originality/value: – The study contributes to the literature by providing researchers seeking to adopt SEM as an analytical method with practical guidelines for making better choices concerning an appropriate SEM approach. Furthermore, based on a systematic review of current practices in the international business and marketing literature, the authors identify critical challenges in the selection and use of SEM procedures and offer concrete recommendations for better practice.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/imr-04-2014-0148

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 13 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Richter, N. F., Sinkovics, R. R., Ringle, C. M., & Schlägel, C.
Venue
International Marketing Review
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2016-05-09
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
376-404
ISSN
0265-1335 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1108/imr-04-2014-0148
OpenAlex
W181628095
Cited by
614
References
13
FWCI
40.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

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.