Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42851456›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2026

Reflective, formative, hybrid, and composite measurement models in social science research: a diagnostic construct-measurement alignment framework.

Taisith Kruasom

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Taisith KruasomFaculty of Management Science, Ubon Ratchathani University, Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Measurement-model specification remains a persistent source of conceptual and statistical error in social science research. Existing guidance distinguishes reflective, causal-indicator/formative, hybrid, higher-order, and composite models, yet applied studies often select among them through disciplinary convention, software defaults, or

Indexed as

construct validityformative measurementhybrid constructsmeasurement model specificationreflective measurementresearch transparencystructural equation modeling

Identifiers

PMID42851456
PMCPMC13646164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.