The nature of doubly concrete constructs and how to identify them

Lars Bergkvist

Journal of Business Research, 2016, vol. 69, issue 9, 3427-3429

Abstract: The study by Sarstedt, Diamantopoulos, Salzberger, and Baumgartner (JBR, 2016) claims to refute the results in the studies by Bergkvist and Rossiter (2007, 2009) that single-item measures are more valid than multiple-item measures for doubly concrete constructs. This rejoinder argues that the methodology of Sarstedt et al.'s study has flaws, their conclusions are unwarranted, and the recommendation that marketing researchers should use carefully crafted single-item measures for doubly concrete constructs should remain unchanged.

Keywords: Measurement; C-OAR-SE method; Psychometrics; Single-item measure; Multiple-item measure; Doubly concrete constructs (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296316000606
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:69:y:2016:i:9:p:3427-3429

DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.001

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Business Research is currently edited by A. G. Woodside

More articles in Journal of Business Research from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().