NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ1122783
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2016
Pages: 5
Abstractor: ERIC
ISSN: ISSN-1536-6367
Distinguishing Valid from Invalid Causal Indicator Models
Cadogan, John W.; Lee, Nick
Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, v14 n4 p162-166 2016
In this commentary from Issue 14, n3, authors John Cadogan and Nick Lee applaud the paper by Aguirre-Urreta, Rönkkö, and Marakas "Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives", 14(3), 75-97 (2016), since their explanations and simulations work toward demystifying causal indicator models, which are often used by scholars wishing to measure latent variables. In their comment they focus on the utility of using causal indicator models to provide information on latent variables, reflecting on the conditions under which causal indicator models may provide valid conclusions about the variance of the latent variables they purportedly measure and specifying the conditions under which causal indicator models should not be used in this regard. They conclude that causal indicator models (a) are often used inappropriately and so do not provide valid information on the latent variable one wishes to model, (b) are (possibly too) unwieldy as methods of providing valid information on a focal latent variable, and (c) should probably be abandoned in favor of reflective methods for measuring constructs of interest until additional research is conducted to provide guidance on how to use them to make valid conclusions about focal latent variables.
Psychology Press. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site:
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Opinion Papers
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Grant or Contract Numbers: N/A