Reasons for using PLS-SEM
| Reasons | Number of studies (n = 107) | Proportion (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Small sample size | 50 | 46.72 |
| Nonnormal data | 47 | 43.92 |
| High model complexity | 23 | 21.49 |
| Theory development and exploratory research | 20 | 18.69 |
| Predictive study focus | 18 | 16.82 |
| Theory testing | 9 | 8.41 |
| Formative measures | 6 | 5.60 |
| Explain variance in the endogenous constructs | 5 | 4.67 |
| PLS-SEM's popularity and standard use in the field | 5 | 4.67 |
| Other reasons (e.g. moderation effects; latent variable scores availability; mediation effects; higher statistical power than CB-SEM; multi-group analysis) | 12 | 11.21 |
| Reasons | Number of studies ( | Proportion (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Small sample size | 50 | 46.72 |
| Nonnormal data | 47 | 43.92 |
| High model complexity | 23 | 21.49 |
| Theory development and exploratory research | 20 | 18.69 |
| Predictive study focus | 18 | 16.82 |
| Theory testing | 9 | 8.41 |
| Formative measures | 6 | 5.60 |
| Explain variance in the endogenous constructs | 5 | 4.67 |
| PLS-SEM's popularity and standard use in the field | 5 | 4.67 |
| Other reasons (e.g. moderation effects; latent variable scores availability; mediation effects; higher statistical power than CB-SEM; multi-group analysis) | 12 | 11.21 |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.