2020/05/22 by Benjamin D. Liengaard, Benjamin Dybro Liengaard, Pratyush Nidhi Sharma +5 · 11 citations
Business, Management and Accounting · Decision Sciences · Economics, Econometrics and Finance · #Customer Service Quality and Loyalty #Economic and Environmental Valuation #Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
paper · pdf · doi:10.1111/deci.12445
crossref issued 2020/05/22 · crossref published 2020/05/22 · crossref published-online 2020/05/22 · openalex publication_date 2020/05/22 · crossref created 2020/05/22 · crossref published-print 2021/04/01 · crossref deposited 2024/08/06 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · crossref indexed 2026/07/30 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
ABSTRACT Management researchers often develop theories and policies that are forward‐looking. The prospective outlook of predictive modeling, where a model predicts unseen or new data, can complement the retrospective nature of causal‐explanatory modeling that dominates the field. Partial least squares (PLS) path modeling is an excellent tool for building theories that offer both explanation and prediction. A limitation of PLS, however, is the lack of a statistical test to assess whether a proposed or alternative theoretical model offers significantly better out‐of‐sample predictive power than a benchmark or an established model. Such an assessment of predictive power is essential for theory development and validation, and for selecting a model on which to base managerial and policy decisions. We introduce the cross‐validated predictive ability test (CVPAT) to conduct a pairwise comparison of predictive power of competing models, and substantiate its performance via multiple Monte Carlo studies. We propose a stepwise predictive model comparison procedure to guide researchers, and demonstrate CVPAT's practical utility using the well‐known American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) model.