Andrei Mikhailov

• Doctor of Business Administration
• Postdoctoral fellow at Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos

Hello guys, I Have a question, I have structural equation model with multiple mediators, 2 mediator variables are dummy and 2 are continuous. I also heard that there is different manners of running moderation analysis in different software.

In terms of dificulty, which software is less dificult to run SEM with multiple mediator variables? AMOS ou SmartPLS? And Why?

Thank you in advance.

Kind regards?

Now the Arizona website offers only fzQCA version 4.0

Hello guys,

I read some nice articles explain the MSDO-MDSO for reducing number of conditions used within qualitative-comparative analysis. However, all of them lack the explanation for interpretation of tables created at the fourth phase of analysis - identification of relevant causal conditions - Outstanding pairs

The results were generated through online MSDO-MDSO software: version 1.1 - spring 2015 (jchr.be), available at the website https://compasss.org/software/

Thank you in advance!

Hello guys, I have very strange problem.

I run 2 different models in SPSS AMOS, using the same variables, same dataset and directions of relations (attached), except for independent latent variables in the model . Latent variables used in both models previously were run through factor analysis and were all ok.

The model 1 obtained good model fit and all main indicators. However, after trying the model 2 I received "Unidentified model, you will need to add 1 addition contraint".

I've read many explanations about the term in other researchgate questions, however they are all not comprehensivable in practical terms. What should I do? Please help.

Thank to all of you in advance!

Hello guys, I have very strange problem.

I run 2 different models in SPSS AMOS, using the same variables, same dataset and directions of relations (attached), except for independent latent variables in the model . Latent variables used in both models previously were run through factor analysis and were all ok.

The model 1 obtained good model fit and all main indicators. However, after running the model 2 I received "Unidentified model, you will need to add 1 addition contraint".

I've read many explanations about the term in other researchgate questions, however they are all not comprehensivable in practical terms. What should I do? Please help.

Thank to all of you in advance!

Hello Guys,

I'm performing factor analysis in SPSS with 168 observations of likert-scale variables, EFA generates two factors, thus Factor 1 includes 3 variables and loading scores are high (0.777, 0.785, 0.421) and so the composite realibility and extracted variance, around 0.8. However, cronbach Alpha for internal consistency showed value of only 0.52.

The Factor 2 showed good values for all three measures, so the only problem is internal consistency of the Factor 1. The discriminant validity between two factor is also good. KMO of whole construct is around 0.75.

In this case, can I consider this "problematic" factor as "valid"? Otherwise, what can I do to solve this issue?

The idea is to use them within Structural Equation Modelling later. Thank to all of you in advance!

Both Smirnov-Kolmogorov and Shapiro showed non-normal distribution, and skewness were generally between 0,6 and 1,2 (at likert-scale from 1 to 5, mean was higher than 4 for all variables).

As Spearman is a non-parametric test, should it present higher correlations than Pearson?

I've applied a survey with approximately 200 innovative companies, using widely validated by previous studies innovation capabilities measurement instrument, likert-scale from 1 to 5

As the capabilities of the companies (all of the involved in University-Industry Cooperation) showed very high results, most values are concentrated on 4 and 5, so, skewness is really high. Smirnov-Kolmorov showed non-normal distribution for almost all variables (spreadsheet attached)

Sample have almost no outliers. And the thing is it was not possible to foresee ex-ante that firm's capabilites would be so high.

My data analysis technique will be QCA, however, I would like to perform first the CFA first.

Please, help me! Thank all of you in advance!

How should calibration be performed when all input variables are binary?

Guys! I'm writing in English but you can answer in Portuguese. Currently I'm conducting a research using validated innovation capabilities scale of 4 factors developed for manufacturing firms (validation with 1300 companies). After obtaining 50 questions as pilot test (which was supposed to be a pure formality), I conducted the factor analysis which showed completely different results from the factor in original scale, without any logic of allocation of variables into factors, and the number of factors in much higher, and cronbach alpha for many factors are below 0.6.

Some details: The application process have been going really well. The sample I'm using is composed by manufacturing firms located in the same country of the article's survey which validated the construct. What I noticed is that in my sample vast majority of firms are either high-capabilities or medium-capabilities, while in the survey used by the article that validated the scale the majority are low-capabilities. Therefore, in my sample the standard deviations for each factor is around 0,4, while mean is about 3.9-4.4 in scale of 5.