Table 3 Structural model evaluation... | Emerald Publishing

Table 3

Structural model evaluation

Criterion	Empirical test criterion in PLS-SEM	Number of models (n = 124)	Proportion (%)
Path coefficients	Values	123	99.19
Significance of path coefficients	Standard errors, significance levels, t values/p values	99	79.83
	Confidence intervals	0	0.00
	Both	23	18.54
Effect size	f²	37	29.83
Explanatory power	R²	114	91.93
Model fit	GoF	23	18.54
	SRMR	6	4.83
	Other	4	3.22
Predictive relevance (blindfolding)	Q²	58	46.77
Predictive relevance (blindfolding)	q²	14	11.29
Predictive power (PLS_predict)	Q²_predict	0	–
	LM comparison	0	–
Predictive model comparison	BIC, GM, CVPAT	0^a	–

Criterion	Empirical test criterion in PLS-SEM	Number of models (n = 124)	Proportion (%)
Path coefficients	Values	123	99.19
Significance of path coefficients	Standard errors, significance levels, t values/p values	99	79.83
	Confidence intervals	0	0.00
	Both	23	18.54
Effect size	f²	37	29.83
Explanatory power	R²	114	91.93
Model fit	GoF	23	18.54
	SRMR	6	4.83
	Other	4	3.22
Predictive relevance (blindfolding)	Q²	58	46.77
Predictive relevance (blindfolding)	q²	14	11.29
Predictive power (PLS_predict)	Q²_predict	0	–
	LM comparison	0	–
Predictive model comparison	BIC, GM, CVPAT	0^a	–

Note(s): ^aOne article mentions that AIC (Akaike's information criteria) were used to compare two different model specifications, but does not provide any data