Higher-order models with reflective indicators A rejoinder to a recent call for their abandonment

Purpose - Higher-order factor models have recently been dismissed as a 'misleading', 'meaningless', and 'needless' approach for modeling multidimensional constructs (Lee and Cadogan, 2013; L&C, 2013 hereafter). The purpose of this paper is to show that - in contrast to L&C's (2013) verdict - higher-order factor models are still a legitimate operationalization option for multidimensional constructs. Design/methodology/approach - Basic conceptual and statistical premises of L&C's (2013) arguments against higher-order factor models are scrutinized both conceptually and statistically as to their logic and validity. Findings - A thorough analysis of L&C's (2013) arguments shows that they are fundamentally flawed both conceptually and statistically, rendering their conclusions invalid. Research limitations/implications - Researchers should not remove the well-established higher-order factor models from their methodological toolkit. Furthermore, empirical findings should not automatically be considered suspect simply because higher-factor models have been used to model multidimensional constructs. Originality/value - So far, L&C's (2013) arguments against higher-order factor models have gone unchallenged in the literature. This rejoinder is a first, much needed attempt to protect applied researchers from getting the false impression that by using higher-factor models, they rely on a misleading or meaningless modeling approach.