Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The two common approaches to Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) are the Covariance-Based SEM (CB-SEM) and Partial Least Squares SEM (PLS-SEM). There is much debate on the performance of CB-SEM and PLS-SEM for small sample size and when distributions are nonnormal. This study evaluates the performance of CB-SEM and PLS-SEM under normality and nonnormality conditions via a simulation. Monte Carlo Simulation in R programming language was employed to generate data based on the theoretical model with one endogenous and four exogenous variables. Each latent variable has three indicators. For normal distributions, CB-SEM estimates were found to be inaccurate for small sample size while PLS-SEM could produce the path estimates. Meanwhile, for a larger sample size, CB-SEM estimates have lower variability compared to PLS-SEM. Under nonnormality, CB-SEM path estimates were inaccurate for small sample size. However, CB-SEM estimates are more accurate than those of PLS-SEM for sample size of 50 and above. The PLS-SEM estimates are not accurate unless sample size is very large.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jannoo et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: