Table 3 Hypotheses testing Structural...

Table 3

Hypotheses testing

Structural path	(β)	t-stats	p-values	Hypotheses	R²	Q²	f²
OJ					0.999
DO					0.322	0.233
SPR					0.402	0.267
LOCs
Procedural → OJ	0.347	18.268	0.000
Distributive → OJ	0.218	21.034	0.000
Interactive → OJ	0.229	18.489	0.000
Informational → OJ	0.394	26.140	0.000
Direct (HOC)
OJ → DO	0.450	6.894	0.000	H1: Supported			0.179
OJ → SPR	0.634	12.824	0.000	H2: Supported			0.672
SPR → DO	0.162	2.017	0.044	H3: Supported			0.023
Indirect (mediation)
OJ → SPR → DO	0.103	1.968	0.041	H4: Supported

Structural path	(β)	t-stats	p-values	Hypotheses	R²	Q²	f²
OJ					0.999
DO					0.322	0.233
SPR					0.402	0.267
LOCs
Procedural → OJ	0.347	18.268	0.000
Distributive → OJ	0.218	21.034	0.000
Interactive → OJ	0.229	18.489	0.000
Informational → OJ	0.394	26.140	0.000
Direct (HOC)
OJ → DO	0.450	6.894	0.000	H1: Supported			0.179
OJ → SPR	0.634	12.824	0.000	H2: Supported			0.672
SPR → DO	0.162	2.017	0.044	H3: Supported			0.023
Indirect (mediation)
OJ → SPR → DO	0.103	1.968	0.041	H4: Supported

Note(s): “R² of 0.25, 0.5 and 0.75 is considered as weak, moderate and substantial respectively; Q² of 0.02, 0.15 and 0.35 is considered as small, medium and large, respectively; f² of 0.02, 0.15 and 0.35 is seen as small, medium and large, respectively”

Source(s): Table by authors

[ViewLarge]

Sharing Unavailable