title: Interpretational Confounding or Confounded Interpretations of Causal Indicators?
abstract: In measurement theory causal indicators are controversial and little-understood. Methodological disagreement concerning causal indicators has centered on the question of whether causal indicators are inherently sensitive to interpretational confounding, which occurs when the empirical meaning of a latent construct departs from the meaning intended by a researcher. This article questions the validity of evidence used to claim that causal indicators are inherently susceptible to interpretational confounding. Further, a simulation study demonstrates that causal indicator coefficients are stable across correctly-specified models. Determining the suitability of causal indicators has implications for the way we conceptualize measurement and build and evaluate measurement models.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
authors.forename: Sierra A
authors.initials: SA
authors.lastname: Bainter
authors.affiliation: Department of Sociology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
authors.forename: Kenneth A
authors.initials: KA
authors.lastname: Bollen
keywords: causal indicators; formative measurement; latent variables; measurement; structural equation modeling