Información del artículo
RESUMEN
Los test estadísticos se utilizan de forma generalizada como criterio de evaluación de escalas de medida de constructos latentes en organización de empresas y marketing. Sin embargo, la utilización de éstos puede llevar a conclusiones erróneas sobre la validez de las escalas de medida, si no se consideran las divergencias en cuanto al contenido teórico que los conceptos susceptibles de ser medidos poseen. Este trabajo muestra a través de un ejemplo real como, en el caso de los análisis encaminados a estudiar la validez discriminante entre conceptos, existen varios procedimientos estadísticos que ofrecen resultados confrontados. Por tanto, la validez de contenido debe de ser el principal argumento para concluir que dos escalas que miden conceptos dispares, realmente divergen.
PALABRAS CLAVE:
Validez discriminante
Modelos de ecuaciones estructurales
Validez de contenido
Escalas de medida
ABSTRACT
There is a widespread use of statistical tests to evaluate measurement scales of latent constructs in the business arena. However, the results of these tests can yield misleading conclusions regarding the validity of measurement scales. Therefore, content validity has to be considered in order to avoid misleading outcomes. Through an empirical example, this paper shows how different statistical tests used to analyse discriminant validity yield ambiguous findings. Consequently, discriminant validity should be theoretically established.
KEYWORDS:
Discriminant validity
Structural equation modelling
Content validity
Measurement scales
El Texto completo está disponible en PDF
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[ANDERSON, and GERBING, 1988]
J.C. ANDERSON, D.W. GERBING.
“Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A review and recommended two-step approach”.
Psychological Bulletin, 103 (1988), pp. 411-423
[BAGOZZI, et al., 1991]
R.P. BAGOZZI, Y. Yi, L.W. PHILLIPS.
“Assessing construct validity in organizational research”.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 36 (1991), pp. 421-458
[BORSBOOM et al., 2003]
D. BORSBOOM, G.J. MELLENBERGH, J. VAN HEERDEN.
“The theoretical status of latent variables”.
Psychological Review, 110 (2003), pp. 203-219
[BORSBOOM et al., 2004]
D. BORSBOOM, G.J. MELLENBERGH, J. VAN HEERDEN.
“The concept of validity”.
Psychological Review, 111 (2004), pp. 1061-1071
[BRADY, et al., 2002]
M.K. BRADY, J.J. CRONIN, R.R. BRAND.
“Performance-Only Measurement of Service Quality: A Replication and Extension”.
Journal of Business Research, (2002), pp. 17-31
[BRADY and CRONIN, 2001]
M.K. BRADY, J.J. CRONIN Jr..
“Some New Thoughts on Conceptualizing Perceived Service Quality: A Hierarchical Approach”.
Journal of Marketing, 65 (2001), pp. 34-49
[CAMPBELl and FISKE, 1959]
D.T. CAMPBELl, D.W. FISKE.
“Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix”.
Psychological Bulletin, (1959), pp. 81-105
[CATTEL, 1946]
R.B. CATTEL.
Description and measurement of personality, Ed World Book Company, (1946),
[COHEN, 1977]
J. COHEN.
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Academic Press, (1977),
[COHEN, 1988]
J. COHEN.
Statistical Power Analysis for The Behavioural Sciences, 2nd edition, Ed. Erlbaum, (1988),
[COHEN, 1994]
J. COHEN.
“The earth is round (p < .05)”.
American Psychologist, 49 (1994), pp. 997-1003
[COOK and CAMPBELL, 1979]
T. COOK, D. CAMPBELL.
Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings, Houghton Mifflin, (1979),
[CRONBACH and MEEHL, 1955]
L.J. CRONBACH, P.E. MEEHL.
“Construct validity in psychological test”.
Pyschological Bulletin, (1955), pp. 218-302
[FORNELL and LARCKER, 1981]
C. FORNELL, D.F. LARCKER.
“Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”.
Journal of Marketing Research, 27 (1981), pp. 39-50
[HANCOCK and MUELLER, 2001]
G.R. HANCOCK, R.O. MUELLER.
“Rethinking construct reliability within latent variable systems”.
Structural Equation Modeling: Present and Future – A Festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog,
[HAYDUK, 1996]
L.A. HAYDUK.
LISREL Issues, Debates and Strategies, Ed. Johns Hopkins University Press, (1996),
[HAYDUK and GLASER, 2000]
L.A. HAYDUK, D.N. GLASER.
“Jiving the four-step, waltzing around factor analysis, and other serious fun”.
Structural Equation Modeling, (2000), pp. 1-35
[KAPLAN et al., 2000]
D. KAPLAN, P. HARIK, L. HOTCHKISS.
“Cross-sectional estimation of dynamic structural equation models in disequilibrium”.
Structural Equation Modeling: Present and Future. A Festschrift in Honor of Karl G. Joreskog,
[KLINE, 2005]
R.B. KLINE.
Principles and practice of structural equation modelling, 2nd ed., The Guildford Press, (2005),
[KLINE, 2006]
R.B. KLINE.
“Reverse arrow dynamics”.
Second course in structural equation modeling,
[MARKUS, 1998]
K.A. MARKUS.
“Science, measurement, and validity: Is completion of Samuel Messick's synthesis possible?”.
Social Indicators Research, (1998), pp. 7-34
[MARTÍNEZ, 2009]
J.A. MARTÍNEZ.
“Discriminant distance: A new form of evaluating the distance between variables.”.
Methodology. Aceptado, (2009),
[MARTÍNEZ et al., 2006]
J.A. MARTÍNEZ, E. FLORES, L. MARTÍNEZ.
“La relación causal entre la calidad percibida, satisfacción e imagen corporativa en la determinación de la lealtad”.
XVIII Encuentro de Profesores Universitarios de Marketing, Almería, (2006),
[MITTAL et al., 1998]
V. MITTAL, W.T. ROSS Jr., P.M. BALDASER.
“The asymmetric impact of negative and positive attributelevel performance on overall satisfaction and repurchase intentions”.
Journal of Marketing, 62 (1998), pp. 33-47
[NGUYEN and LEBLANC, 1998]
N. NGUYEN, G. LEBLANC.
“The mediating role of corporate image on customers retention decisions: An investigation in financial services”.
International Journal of Bank Marketing, 16 (1998), pp. 52-65
[OLSEN, 2002]
S.O. OLSEN.
“Comparative Evaluation and the Relationship between Quality, Satisfaction, and Repurchase Loyalty”.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30 (2002), pp. 240-249
[PODSAKOFF et al., 2003]
P.M. PODSAKOFF, S.B. MACKENZIE, J.Y. LEE, N.P. PODSAKOFF.
“Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (2003), pp. 879-903
[RODRÍGUEZ et al., 2002]
S. RODRÍGUEZ, C. CAMARERO, J. GUTIÉRREZ.
“Lealtad y valor en la relación del consumidor. Una aplicación al caso de los servicios financieros”.
XIV Encuentro de Profesores Universitarios de Marketing, Granada, (2002),
[ROSENTHAL and RUBIN, 1994]
R. ROSENTHAL, D.B. RUBIN.
“The counternull value of an effect size: A new statistic”.
Psychological Science, (1994), pp. 329-334
[ROSNOW and ROSENTHAl, 1996]
R.L. ROSNOW, R. ROSENTHAl.
“Computing contrasts, effect sizes, and counternulls on other people's published data: General procedures for research consumers”.
Psychological Methods, (1996), pp. 331-340
[STEENKAMP and VAN TRIJP, 1991]
J.B.E.M. STEENKAMP, H.C.M. VAN TRIJP.
“The Use of LISREL in Validating Marketing Constructs”.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, (1991), pp. 283-299
[STEIGER, 1980]
J.H. STEIGER.
“Test for Comparing Elements of a Correlation Matrix”.
Psychological Bulletin, (1980), pp. 245-281
[STEIGER and FOULADI, 1992]
J.H. STEIGER, R.T. FOULADI.
“R2: A Computer Program for Interval Estimation, Power Calculation, and Hypothesis Testing for the Squared Multiple Correlation”.
Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, (1992), pp. 581-582
[TEAS, 1993]
R. TEAS.
“Expectations, performance evaluation, and consumer's perceptions of quality”.
Journal of Marketing, 57 (1993), pp. 18-31
[ZEITHAML, 1988]
V.A. ZEITHAML.
“Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence”.
Journal of Marketing, 52 (1988), pp. 2-22
[ZEITHAML et al., 1996]
V. ZEITHAML, L. BERRY, A. PARASURAMAN.
“The behavioral consequences of service quality”.
Journal of Marketing, 60 (1996), pp. 31-34
Copyright © 2009. Academia Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa
