Cheryl Burke Jarvis

A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research

A review of the literature suggests that few studies use formative indicator measurement models, even though they should. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to (a) discuss the distinction between formative and reflective measurement models, (b) develop a set of conceptual criteria that can be used to determine whether a construct should be modeled as having formative or reflective indicators, (c) review the marketing literature to obtain an estimate of the extent of measurement model misspecification in the field, (d) estimate the extent to which measurement model misspecification biases estimates of the relationships between constructs using a Monte Carlo simulation, and (e) provide recommendations for modeling formative indicator constructs. Copyright 2003 by the University of Chicago.

The Problem of Measurement Model Misspecification in Behavioral and Organizational Research and Some Recommended Solutions

The purpose of this study was to review the distinction between formative- and reflective-indicator measurement models, articulate a set of criteria for deciding whether measures are formative or reflective, illustrate some commonly researched constructs that have formative indicators, empirically test the effects of measurement model misspecification using a Monte Carlo simulation, and recommend new scale development procedures for latent constructs with formative indicators. Results of the Monte Carlo simulation indicated that measurement model misspecification can inflate unstandardized structural parameter estimates by as much as 400% or deflate them by as much as 80% and lead to Type I or Type II errors of inference, depending on whether the exogenous or the endogenous latent construct is misspecified. Implications of this research are discussed.

The Role of Customer Gratitude in Relationship Marketing

Most theories of relationship marketing emphasize the role of trust and commitment in affecting performance outcomes; however, a recent meta-analysis indicates that other mediating mechanisms are at work. Data from two studies—a laboratory experiment and a dyadic longitudinal field survey—demonstrate that gratitude also mediates the influence of a sellers relationship marketing investments on performance outcomes. Specifically, relationship marketing investments generate short-term feelings of gratitude that drive long-lasting performance benefits based on gratitude-related reciprocal behaviors. The authors identify a set of managerially relevant factors and test their power to alter customer perceptions of relationship marketing investments to increase customer gratitude, which can make relationship marketing programs more effective. Overall, the research empirically demonstrates that gratitude plays an important role in understanding how relationship marketing investments increase purchase intentions, sales growth, and share of wallet.

If Looks Could Sell: Moderation and Mediation of the Attractiveness Effect on Salesperson Performance

This study empirically investigates the effect of perceived salesperson attractiveness on actual salesperson performance, focusing first on the moderating effect of length of the buyer - salesperson relationship and then on the mediating effects of perceived communication ability, likeability, expertise, and trustworthiness on the attractiveness effect. A sample of 339 physicians was surveyed to obtain their evaluations of pharmaceutical company sales representatives’ attractiveness as well as their perceptions of the mediators. Actual brand-by-brand market share data of the subject physicians’ prescriptions was collected as the dependent variable. The results showed that perceived salesperson attractiveness had a significant positive effect on salesperson performance, but the effect was found to diminish as the length of the salesperson-customer relationship increased. Three of the four proposed mediators were found to partially mediate the effect of attractiveness on sales performance.

The negative consequences of measurement model misspecification: a response to Aguirre-Urreta and Marakas

It has been more than 40 years since Blalock (1964) noted thedistinction between what he called “cause” (formative) and“effect” (reflective) indicators of latent variables, and threedecades since the academic literature recognized that someSEM measurement models don’t fit classical test theory’sassumptions about the direction of causality of the relation-ships between constructs and their indicators (Bagozzi 1981;Fornell and Bookstein 1982). Since that time, interest inmodeling constructs with formative indicators has signi-ficantly increased in the business, social science, and informa-tion systems literatures (e.g., Bollen 2007; Cenfetelli andBassellier 2009; Diamantopoulos and Papadopoulos 2010;Diamantopoulos et al. 2008; Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer2001; Edwards and Bagozzi, 2000; Jarvis et. al. 2003; Lawand Wong 1999; MacKenzie et al. 2005; Marakas et al. 2007;Petter et al. 2007), and an increasing number of academicstudies are incorporating these types of measurement modelsin their substantive investigations. However, recentlyresearchers in a variety of disciplines (Franke et al. 2008;Howell et al. 2007; Kim et al. 2010) have raised questionssurrounding the correct conceptualization and operationa-lization of formative indicator measurement models.