ArticleScientific reports2025
A flexible way to study composites in ecology using structural equation modeling.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Moderated mediation with composites: The composite moderated structural equations approach.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Composites, which refer to weighted linear combinations of variables, are receiving increasing attention in the field of ecology. In practice, however, researchers relying on the common approaches to study composites encounter limitations in flexibly specifying composites with structural equation modeling (SEM). To enrich the researchers' statistical toolbox and to flexibly model composites in structural equation models, we introduce the Henseler-Ogasawara (H-O) specification to the field of ecology. As we show in this paper, this approach can not only mimic the common approaches such as the one-step and two-step approaches, but also offers improvements. Compared to the two-step approach, the H-O specification explicitly models composites, i.e., it takes into account the formation of the composites and it allows modeling composites with free weights and with fixed weights, i.e., unknown-weight and fixed weight composites. Consequently, this specification allows for a more in-depth model assessment. Compared to the one-step approach, the H-O specification offers more modeling flexibility. For example, it allows researchers to specify the effects of other variables on a composite. Consequently, conceptual models can be more adequately represented by the statistical model using this specification. To demonstrate these advantages, we provide an ecological illustrative example including the R code to reproduce our results. Specifically, we present different H-O specifications and compare them statistically. Our analysis also shows that the specified model, closest to the conceptual model of the illustrative example does not adequately describe the data. Instead, a model that does not assume that all covariances between the components of the composites are accounted for by the composites fits the data well.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.