Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Subscribe now for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Method Variance in Organizational Research

Method Variance in Organizational Research It has become widely accepted that correlations between variables measured with the same method, usually self-report surveys, are inflated due to the action of common method variance (CMV), despite a number of sources that suggest the problem is overstated. The author argues that the popular position suggesting CMV automatically affects variables measured with the same method is a distortion and oversimplification of the true state of affairs, reaching the status of urban legend. Empirical evidence is discussed casting doubt that the method itself produces systematic variance in observations that inflates correlations to any significant degree. It is suggested that the term common method variance be abandoned in favor of a focus on measurement bias that is the product of the interplay of constructs and methods by which they are assessed. A complex approach to dealing with potential biases involves their identification and control to rule them out as explanations for observed relationships using a variety of design strategies. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Organizational Research Methods SAGE

Method Variance in Organizational Research

Organizational Research Methods , Volume 9 (2): 12 – Apr 1, 2006

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/method-variance-in-organizational-research-JqnclIITWf

References (37)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © by SAGE Publications
ISSN
1094-4281
eISSN
1552-7425
DOI
10.1177/1094428105284955
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

It has become widely accepted that correlations between variables measured with the same method, usually self-report surveys, are inflated due to the action of common method variance (CMV), despite a number of sources that suggest the problem is overstated. The author argues that the popular position suggesting CMV automatically affects variables measured with the same method is a distortion and oversimplification of the true state of affairs, reaching the status of urban legend. Empirical evidence is discussed casting doubt that the method itself produces systematic variance in observations that inflates correlations to any significant degree. It is suggested that the term common method variance be abandoned in favor of a focus on measurement bias that is the product of the interplay of constructs and methods by which they are assessed. A complex approach to dealing with potential biases involves their identification and control to rule them out as explanations for observed relationships using a variety of design strategies.

Journal

Organizational Research MethodsSAGE

Published: Apr 1, 2006

There are no references for this article.