Error in Variables: Analysis of Covariance Structure – Structural Equation Models

  • Hubert Gatignon


In this chapter, we bring together the notions of measurement error discussed in Chaps. 3 and 4 with the structural modeling of simultaneous relationships presented in Chap. 6. We demonstrate that a bias is introduced when estimating the relationship between two variables measured with error if that measurement error is ignored. We then present a methodology for estimating the parameters of structural relationships between variables that are not observed directly: analysis of covariance structures. We focus on the role of the measurement model as discussed in Chap. 4 with the confirmatory factor analytic model.


Confirmatory Factor Analysis Measurement Model Covariance Structure Canonical Correlation Analysis Canonical Variate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Basic Technical ReadingsGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(Spring), 74–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 421–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bearden, W. O., Sharma, S., & Teel, J. E. (1982). Sample size effects on chi square and other statistics used in evaluating causal models. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 425–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bentler, P. M. (1980). Multivariate analysis with latent variables: Causal modeling. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 419–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110(2), 305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gerbin, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1987). Improper solutions in the analysis of covariance structures: Their interpretability and a comparison of alternate respecifications. Psychometrika, 52(1), 99–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Joreskog, K. G. (1973). A general method for estimating a linear structural equation system. In A. S. Goldberger & O. D. Duncan (Eds.), Structural equation models in the social sciences (pp. 85–112). NY: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
  12. Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Dean Stilwell, C. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 430–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Application ReadingsGoogle Scholar
  14. Ahearne, M., Gruen, T. W., & Jarvis, C. B. (1999). If looks could sell: Moderation and mediation of the attractiveness effect on salesperson performance. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 16(4), 269–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Anderson, J. C. (1987). An approach for confirmatory measurement and structural equation modeling of organizational properties. Management Science, 33(4), 525–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Anderson, J. C., & Narus, J. A. (1990). A model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. Journal of Marketing, 54, 42–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bagozzi, R. P., & Dholakia, U. M. (2006). Open source software user communities: A study of participation in linux user groups. Management Science, 52(7), 1099–1115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Baumgartner, H., & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13, 139–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bentler, P. M., & Mooijaart, A. (1989). Choice of structural model via parsimony: A rationale based on precision. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 315–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Capron, L. (1999). The long-term performance of horizontal acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 20(11), 987–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cudeck, R. (1989). Analysis of correlation matrices using covariance structure models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(2), 317–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Edwards, J. R., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). On the nature and direction of relationships between constructs and measures. Psychological Methods, 5(2), 155–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Elsbach, K. D., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Defining who you are by what you’re not : Organizational disidentification and the National Rifle Association. Organization Science, 12(4), 393–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 70–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2), 186–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gilbert, F. W., & Warren, W. E. (1995). Psychographic constructs and demographic segments. Psychology and Marketing, 12(3), 223–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kuester, S., Homburg, C., & Robertson, T. S. (1999). Retaliatory behavior to new product entry. Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 90–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kumar, A., & Dillon, W. R. (1990). On the use of confirmatory measurement models in the analysis of multiple-informant reports. Journal of Marketing Research, 27(1), 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(2), 130–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meyer, S. M., & Collier, D. A. (2001). An empirical test of the causal relationships in the Balridge health care pilot criteria. Journal of Operations Management, 19, 403–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Murtha, T. P., Lenway, S. A., & Bagozzi, R. P. (1998). Global mind-sets and cognitive shift in a complex multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Philips, L. W. (1981). Assessing measurement error in key informant reports: A methodological note on organizational analysis in marketing. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(4), 395–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Philips, L. W., Chang, D. R., & Buzzell, R. D. (1983). Product quality, cost position and business performance. Journal of Marketing, 47(2), 26–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Reddy, S. K., & LaBarbera, P. A. (1985). Hierarchical models of attitude. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 20, 451–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stimpert, J. L., & Duhaime, I. M. (1997). In the eyes of the beholder: Conceptualizations of the relatedness held by the managers of large diversified firms. Strategic Management Journal, 18(2), 111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Titman, S., & Wessels, R. (1988). The determinants of capital structure choice. The Journal of Finance, 43(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Trieschmann, J. S., Dennis, A. R., Northcraft, G. B., & Niemi, A. W., Jr. (2000). Serving multiple constituencies in business schools: M.B.A. program versus research performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), 1130–1141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vanden Abeele, P. (1989). Comment on: An investigation of the structure of expectancy-value attitude and its implications. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 6, 85–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1987). Planning system success: A conceptualization and an operational model. Management Science, 33(6), 687–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Walters, R. G., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1988). A structural equations analysis of the impact of price promotions on store performance. Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yi, Y. (1989a). An investigation of the structure of expectancy-value attitude and its implications. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 6, 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yi, Y. (1989b). Rejoinder to: An investigation of the structure of expectancy-value attitude and its implications. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 6, 89–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hubert Gatignon
    • 1
  1. 1.INSEADFontainebleau CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations