[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-detail-38853-en":3,"doc-seo-38853-105":29,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":90},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",{"doc_id":7,"user_id":8,"nickname":9,"user_avatar":10,"doc_module":4,"category_id":11,"category_name":12,"doc_title":13,"doc_description":14,"doc_content":15,"file_id":16,"file_url":17,"file_type":18,"file_size":19,"view_count":4,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":20,"is_downloadable":20,"audit_status":20,"page_count":21,"language":22,"language_code":23,"site_id":24,"html_lang":23,"table_of_contents":25,"faqs":26,"seo_title":13,"seo_description":14,"update_tm":27,"read_time":28},38853,1099513958762,"Logic","https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/1000023916a998db790?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1782109480056885918",8,"Research & Report","PLS-SEM or CB-SEM Updated Guidelines on Which Method to Use","Numerous statistical methods are available for social researchers, but selecting an appropriate technique can be difficult. This paper directly compares covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) with variance-based partial least squares SEM (PLS-SEM) using identical measurement and structural modeling setups and the same dataset. Results show that CB-SEM often removes indicators to reach acceptable goodness-of-fit. PLS-SEM yields higher composite reliability and convergent validity, while other metrics are similar. Variance explained in dependent constructs favors PLS-SEM, and updated guidance supports method choice.","PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: updated guidelines on which method to use  \nJoe F. Hair Jr.*  \nMarketing and Quantitative Methods,  \nMitchell College of Business,  \nUniversity of South Alabama,  \n5811 USA Drive South,  \nMobile, AL 36688, USA  \nEmail: [joefhair@gmail.com](joefhair@gmail.com)  \n*Corresponding author  \nLucy M. Matthews  \nDepartment of Marketing,  \nJones College of Business,  \nMiddle Tennessee State University,  \nMTSU Box 40,  \nMurfreesboro, TN 37132, USA  \nEmail: [lucy.matthews@mtsu.edu](lucy.matthews@mtsu.edu)  \n[Ryan L. Matthews](Ryan L. Matthews)  \nRLM Enterprises, L.L.C.,  \n3119 Turret Way,  \nMurfreesboro, TN 37129, USA  \nEmail: [r.lmatthews@hotmail.com](r.lmatthews@hotmail.com)  \nMarko Sarstedt  \nOtto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg,  \nChair of Marketing, Universitätsplatz 2,  \n39106 Magdeburg, Germany  \nand  \nFaculty of Business and Law,  \nUniversity of Newcastle,  \nUniversity Drive,  \nCallaghan, NSW 2308, Australia  \n[Email: marko.sarstedt@ovgu.de](Email: marko.sarstedt@ovgu.de)  \nAbstract: Numerous statistical methods are available for social researchers. Therefore, knowing the appropriate technique can be a challenge. For example, when considering structural equation modelling (SEM), selecting between covariance-based (CB-SEM) and variance-based partial least squares (PLS-SEM) can be challenging. This paper applies the same theoretical  \nCopyright © 2017 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.  \n108 J.F. Hair Jr. et al.  \nmeasurement and structural models and dataset to conduct a direct comparison. The findings reveal that when using CB-SEM, many indicators are removed to achieve acceptable goodness-of-fit, when compared to PLS-SEM. Also, composite reliability and convergent validity were typically higher using PLS-SEM, but other metrics such as discriminant validity and beta coefficients are comparable. Finally, when comparing variance explained in the dependent variable indicators, PLS-SEM was substantially better than CB-SEM. Updated guidelines assist researchers in determining whether CB-SEM or PLS-SEM is the most appropriate method to use.  \nKeywords: structural equation modelling; SEM; PLS-SEM; CB-SEM.  \nReference to this paper should be made as follows: Hair, Jr., J.F., Matthews, L.M., Matthews, R.L. and Sarstedt, M. (2017) ‘PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: updated guidelines on which method to use’, Int. J. Multivariate Data Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp.107–123 .  \nBiographical notes: Joe F. Hair, [Jr. is](Jr. is) Professor of Marketing, DBA Director and the Cleverdon Chair of Business in the Mitchell College of Business, University of South Alabama. He previously was Senior Scholar, DBA Program, Coles College of Business, Kennesaw State University, held the Copeland Endowed Chair of Entrepreneurship and was Director, Entrepreneurship Institute, Ourso College of Business Administration, Louisiana State University. He has authored over 60 books, including Multivariate Data Analysis (7th edition, 2010) (cited 140,000+ times), MKTG (10th edition, 2016), Essentials of Business Research Methods (2016), and Essentials of Marketing Research (4th edition, 2017) .  \nLucy M. Matthews is an Assistant Professor of Marketing in the Jones College of Business at Middle Tennessee State University where she currently leads their sales program. She was awarded the 2017–2018 Middle Tennessee State University, State Farm Outstanding Professor Award. Her research interests include sales and sales management, advance research methodology, as well as cross discipline areas related to marketing such as neuroscience and entrepreneurship. She has published several articles in journals including Journal of Business Research, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, and European Business Review.  \nRyan L. Matthews is currently a consultant at RLM Enterprises, LLC. He received his D.B.A. from Kennesaw State University in December 2016. His research interests include entrepreneurship, advance research methodology, as well as cross discipline areas related to e","cbCaiir530UNJHLM","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiir530UNJHLM","pdf",270993,1,17,"English","en",105,"# Introduction\n## Comparison of CB-SEM and PLS-SEM","[{\"question\":\"What is the main comparison addressed in the paper?\",\"answer\":\"The paper compares covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) and variance-based partial least squares SEM (PLS-SEM) using the same measurement and structural models and the same dataset.\"},{\"question\":\"How do CB-SEM and PLS-SEM differ in achieving goodness-of-fit?\",\"answer\":\"Using CB-SEM typically requires removing many indicators to reach acceptable goodness-of-fit, compared with PLS-SEM.\"},{\"question\":\"Which method explains more variance in dependent variable indicators?\",\"answer\":\"PLS-SEM substantially outperforms CB-SEM in variance explained for the dependent variable indicators.\"}]",1783074022,43,{"code":4,"msg":30,"data":31},"ok",{"site_id":24,"language":23,"slug":32,"title":13,"keywords":33,"description":14,"schema_data":34,"social_meta":85,"head_meta":87,"extra_data":89,"updated_unix":27},"pls-sem-or-cb-sem-updated-guidelines-on-which-method-to-use","",{"@graph":35,"@context":84},[36,53,67],{"@type":37,"itemListElement":38},"BreadcrumbList",[39,43,47,50],{"item":40,"name":41,"@type":42,"position":20},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":44,"name":45,"@type":42,"position":46},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":48,"name":12,"@type":42,"position":49},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":51,"name":13,"@type":42,"position":52},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/pls-sem-or-cb-sem-updated-guidelines-on-which-method-to-use/38853/",4,{"url":51,"name":13,"@type":54,"author":55,"headline":13,"publisher":57,"fileFormat":60,"inLanguage":23,"description":14,"dateModified":61,"datePublished":61,"encodingFormat":60,"isAccessibleForFree":62,"interactionStatistic":63},"DigitalDocument",{"name":9,"@type":56},"Person",{"url":40,"name":58,"@type":59},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-07-03",true,{"@type":64,"interactionType":65,"userInteractionCount":4},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":66},"ViewAction",{"@type":68,"mainEntity":69},"FAQPage",[70,76,80],{"name":71,"@type":72,"acceptedAnswer":73},"What is the main comparison addressed in the paper?","Question",{"text":74,"@type":75},"The paper compares covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) and variance-based partial least squares SEM (PLS-SEM) using the same measurement and structural models and the same dataset.","Answer",{"name":77,"@type":72,"acceptedAnswer":78},"How do CB-SEM and PLS-SEM differ in achieving goodness-of-fit?",{"text":79,"@type":75},"Using CB-SEM typically requires removing many indicators to reach acceptable goodness-of-fit, compared with PLS-SEM.",{"name":81,"@type":72,"acceptedAnswer":82},"Which method explains more variance in dependent variable indicators?",{"text":83,"@type":75},"PLS-SEM substantially outperforms CB-SEM in variance explained for the dependent variable indicators.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":51,"og:type":86,"og:title":13,"og:site_name":58,"og:description":14},"article",{"robots":88,"canonical":51},"index,follow",{"doc_id":7,"site_id":24},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":91},[92,96,100,104,109,114,119,122,127,130,134],{"id":20,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":101,"show_sort_weight":102,"slug":103},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":105,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":11,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":12,"show_sort_weight":120,"slug":121},30,"research-report",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":125,"slug":126},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":125,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":125,"slug":129},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":131,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":132,"show_sort_weight":131,"slug":133},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":135,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":136,"show_sort_weight":105,"slug":137},19,"General","general"]