Successful loyalty in e-complaints: FsQCA and structural equation modeling analyses

Generosity’s antecedents and outcomes - A proposed relationship between Generosity and Intention in Indonesia’s BPJS Kesehatan

“…The relationship of happiness, positive emotion, and satisfaction to intention has been show in various (Barclay, 2013;Su and Hsu, 2013;Corcoran, 2015;Grolleau, Sutan and Vranceanu, 2016;Urueña and Hidalgo, 2016;Whillans, Wispinski and Dunn, 2016). Therefore, the authors propose a relationship between generosity, positive emotion, and intention.…”

Understanding workers’ adoption of productivity mobile applications: a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA)

“…The consistency value was similar to the correlation coefficient, constituting a test of solution adequacy, while the coverage value resembled the coefficient of determination (R 2 ) (Woodside, 2013). Thus, we considered a solution when the consistency value was above 0.65 (Ragin, 2000), although values above 0.75 were recommended; in addition, the coverage should have been between 0.25 and 0.65, although it was accepted when the values differed from these slightly (Urueña & Hidalgo, 2016). Table 2 shows that studies and responsibility variables are close to constituting a necessary condition for the adoption or not of productivity apps, showing a value close to 1 (Legewie, 2013).…”

(Re)examining the effects of athlete brand image (ABI) on psychological commitment: an empirical investigation using structural equation modelling (SEM) and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA)

“…This exercise brought-to-mind people's most salient athlete attributes, suggesting these attributes are important for people's PC towards athletes. Moreover, the highest correlation between variables was below 0.70, implying asymmetric relations exist, and different configurations of independent variables may produce the same outcome (Urueña & Hidalgo, 2016). Hence, a more judicious approach is to assume each of the ten dimensions is important for PC under certain qualitatively-different circumstances.…”

“…Together, the complementarity of SEM's and QCA's findings is an additional contribution to sport management. That is, SEM enables researchers to examine relationship strengths between variables, while QCA allows researchers to observe different configurations of the same variables that lead to a specific outcome (Urueña & Hidalgo, 2016). Thus, despite differing epistemological foundations, the 'pragmatic scholar might argue that these differences…shed a distinct but hopefully complementary light on the research topic at hand' (Vis, 2012, p. 175).…”