University of Wollongong
Browse

Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement

Download (224.62 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2024-11-15, 04:07 authored by Tim Coltman, T M Devinney, D F Midgley, S Venaik
This paper presents a framework that helps researchers to design and validate both formative and reflective measurement models. The framework draws from the existing literature and includes both theoretical and empirical considerations. Two important examples, one from international business and one from marketing, illustrate the use of the framework. Both examples concern constructs that are fundamental to theory-building in these disciplines, and constructs that most scholars measure reflectively. In contrast, applying the framework suggests that a formative measurement model may be more appropriate. These results reinforce the need for all researchers to justify, both theoretically and empirically, their choice of measurement model. Use of an incorrect measurement model undermines the content validity of constructs, misrepresents the structural relationships between them, and ultimately lowers the usefulness of management theories for business researchers and practitioners. The main contribution of this paper is to question the unthinking assumption of reflective measurement seen in much of the business literature.

History

Citation

This article was originally published as Coltman, T, Devinney, TM, Midgley, DF & Veniak, S, Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement, Journal of Business Research, 61(12), 2008, 1250-1262. Original journal article available here

Journal title

Journal of Business Research

Volume

61

Issue

12

Pagination

1250-1262

Language

English

RIS ID

21808

Usage metrics

    Categories

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC