Assumptions and Comparative Strengths of the Two-Step Approach:Comment on Fornell and Yi

James Anderson, David W. Gerbing

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

305 Scopus citations

Abstract

Fornell and Yi (1992 [this issue]) have discussed four assumptions that they contend underlie two-step approaches to structural equation modeling. Each of these assumptions is demonstrated to not be an assumption of the two-step approach recommended by Anderson and Gerbing (1988). In doing so, an attempt is made to provide some clarification and guidance to researchers interested in employing structural equation modeling to test and develop theory. Given the comparative strengths of the two-step approach over a one-step approach in practice, it is concluded that the preferred approach to the modeling task is the two-step approach of Anderson and Gerbing (1988).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)321-333
Number of pages13
JournalSociological Methods & Research
Volume20
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1992

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Sociology and Political Science

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assumptions and Comparative Strengths of the Two-Step Approach:Comment on Fornell and Yi'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this