Validation of an S-O-R Model for Situation, Enduring, and Response Components of Involvement

Abstract

Despite the importance of the concept of involvement, it remains misunderstood. No attempt has been made to establish the reliability and validity of the concept. To resolve apparently conflicting research findings, Houston and Rothschild posit a paradigm which classifies involvement as situational, enduring, and response. The author assesses the reliability and validity of this tripartite classification of involvement by using a multitrait-multimethod matrix approach and a linear structural relations analysis approach. Subsequently, the S-O-R formulation and causality are also tested.

Managing consumer expectations of low‐margin, high‐volume services

“…To assess construct validity, three steps were taken: a confirmatory factor analysis, a discriminant analysis, and coefficient of (Arora, 1982;Joreskog and Sorbom, 1989). The confirmatory factor analysis indicated significant loadings for each of the indicants on their proposed construct (see Table II).…”

Multitrait–multimethod matrices in consumer research: Critique and new developments

“…All analyses were performed with EQS (Bentler, 1989). The first thing to note is that, based on the chi-square goodness-of-fit criterion, all CU models except that for the data in Seymour and Lessne (1984), fit satisfactorily: Z2(15) = 21.70, p ~ .12 (Arora, 1982); Z2(15) = 16.25,p = .37 (Foxman et al, 1989); Z2(15) = 14.02,p = .52 (Menezes & Elbert, 1979); Z2(15) = 27.51, p ~ .02 (Seymour & Lessne, 1984). t Table 1 summarize the results of the parameter estimates for the CU model.…”

How Enduring and Situational Involvement Combine to Create Involvement Responses

“…The idea that EI and SI combine to affect IRs has been widely accepted (Arora, 1982;Bloch & Richins, 1983;Celsi & Olson, 1988;Rothschild, 1979). Stated in symbolic form: IR = f(EI, SI).…”