Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interpreting Structural Equation Modeling Results: A Reply to Martin and Cullen

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article briefly review the fundamentals of structural equation modeling for readers unfamiliar with the technique then goes on to offer a review of the Martin and Cullen paper. In summary, a number of fit indices reported by the authors reveal that the data do not fit their theoretical model and thus the conclusion of the authors that the model was “promising” are unwarranted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Byrne B. M. (2001). Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concept, Applications, and Programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin K. D., Cullen J. B. (2006). Continuities and Extensions of Ethical Climate Theory: A Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of Business Ethics 69:175–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Susquehanna University, Selinsgrove, PA, 17870, U.S.A.

    Paul A. Dion

Authors
  1. Paul A. Dion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul A. Dion.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dion, P.A. Interpreting Structural Equation Modeling Results: A Reply to Martin and Cullen. J Bus Ethics 83, 365–368 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9634-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9634-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation