item 5 covered a specific additional aspect of communication related to their

problems, some researchers (Coote et al., 2003; Li and Dant, 1997) have ignored its
inclusion in the measure. Therefore, deletion of this item does not lose any important
element that should be retained in the measure and will not affect the content and face
validity of this construct. The composite reliability score for this measure is .69 which
signified that these items are considered reliable for this measure.

5.2.2.3 Cultural Similarity: Initial Findings

Cultural similarity between the importer and supplier was measured by a five item
scale. All of these items were subjected to a CFA, the initial results are reported in
Table 5.8. The results of the CFA of the five items indicated that the model was a
poor fit to the data with a high χ2 value of 35.735 (df= 5, p = .000), unacceptable
CMIN/DF and RMSEA scores despite reasonable IFI, TLI, and CFI scores above .90.
Investigation of the covariance structure in the MIs section of this construct measure
specifically suggested that at least one modification was necessary due to associated
misspecification. The Md._Abu_Saleh_Thesis
expected change statistics of error covariances revealed that
2006
three of the four misspecifications were associated with cultural similarity ‘item 2’.
The overall findings of initial analysis for this measure clearly suggest that ‘item 2’
was responsible for the poor fit to the model although it is one of the high loaded
items (standardised loading score is .77) in the model.

112