6533b7cffe1ef96bd1257d51

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Rejoinder: fractures in the edifice of PLS

subject

description

Purpose This study aims to provide a response to the commentary by Yuan on the paper “Marketing or Methodology” in this issue of EJM. Design/methodology/approach Conceptual argument and statistical discussion. Findings The authors find that some of Yuan’s arguments are incorrect, or unclear. Further, rather than contradicting the authors’ conclusions, the material provided by Yuan in his commentary actually provides additional reasons to avoid partial least squares (PLS) in marketing research. As such, Yuan’s commentary is best understood as additional evidence speaking against the use of PLS in real-world research. Research limitations/implications This rejoinder, coupled with Yuan’s comment, continues to support the strong implication that researchers should avoid using PLS in marketing and related research. Practical implications Marketing researchers should avoid using PLS in their work. Originality/value This rejoinder supports the earlier conclusions of “Marketing or Methodology,” with additional argumentation and evidence.