11.07.2015 Views

Index of Paper Presentations for the Parallel Sessions - Academy of ...

Index of Paper Presentations for the Parallel Sessions - Academy of ...

Index of Paper Presentations for the Parallel Sessions - Academy of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

choice <strong>of</strong> using reflective or <strong>for</strong>mative second order factor models (e.g., Bennett and Ali-choudhury 2009).However, in reality, most work uses standard reflective first order models as indicated in Figure 1.Jarvis et al. (2003) discuss <strong>the</strong> possibility <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>mative second order factors, yet few have actually explored itempirically. In fact, although a viable alternative to <strong>the</strong> traditional reflective second order factor model, a <strong>for</strong>mativesecond order model has its own share <strong>of</strong> problems (Howell, Breivik, and Wilcox 2007). For example, <strong>for</strong>mativemeasurement uses conceptions <strong>of</strong> constructs, measures, and causality that are difficult to defend, <strong>the</strong> presumedviability <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>mative measurement is a fallacy, and <strong>the</strong> objectives <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>mative measurement may also be achievedusing alternative models with reflective measures‖(Edwards 2011). Interestingly, <strong>the</strong> Schmid-Leiman Factor Structure (SLS) may <strong>of</strong>fer a better solution in many cases(Wolff and Preising 2005). Hence, this paper tries to:a) Empirically compare and contrast reflective vs. <strong>for</strong>mative second order models.b) Demonstrate <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> SLS approach empirically as a viable alternative to <strong>the</strong> <strong>for</strong>mative second order modelstructure.Specifically, we compare reflective vs. <strong>for</strong>mative second order factor models vs. Schmid-Leiman Factor Structure with data from a mall survey in India that tested <strong>the</strong> impact <strong>of</strong> store environment on impulsebuying.MODEL DEVELOPMENTModel 1 - Reflective Second Order Factor ModelIn line with Baker et al. (2002), we define store environment as consisting <strong>of</strong> ambient (e.g. lighting, scent andmusic), design (layout, assortment) and social factors (presence and effectiveness <strong>of</strong> salespersons). Thus, storeenvironment is a second order factor.Drawing upon extant research in psychology and retailing, we came up with a model.Figure 2 <strong>of</strong>fers <strong>the</strong> standard reflective second order factor model that is <strong>the</strong> ―default‖ option where <strong>the</strong> first orderfactors, social, ambient and design factors are reflective <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> second order factor, store environment.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!