Marker Variable Choice, Reporting, and Interpretation in the Detection of Common Method Variance: A Review and Demonstration

被引:484
作者
Simmering, Marcia J. [1 ,2 ]
Fuller, Christie M. [3 ]
Richardson, Hettie A. [4 ]
Ocal, Yasemin [5 ]
Atinc, Guclu M. [6 ]
机构
[1] Louisiana Tech Univ, Coll Business, Management, Ruston, LA 71272 USA
[2] Louisiana Tech Univ, Undergrad Programs, Coll Business, Ruston, LA 71270 USA
[3] Louisiana Tech Univ, Comp Informat Syst, Ruston, LA 71272 USA
[4] Texas Christian Univ, Dept Management Entrepreneurship & Leadership, Neeley Sch Business, Ft Worth, TX 76129 USA
[5] Texas A&M Univ Commerce, Mkt, Commerce, TX USA
[6] Texas A&M Univ Commerce, Management, Commerce, TX USA
关键词
method variance; survey research; structural equation modeling; marker variable; NEGATIVE AFFECTIVITY; METHOD BIAS; ORGANIZATIONAL-BEHAVIOR; RESPONSE STYLES; MODELS; WORK; PERSPECTIVES; SATISFACTION; ANTECEDENTS; PERCEPTIONS;
D O I
10.1177/1094428114560023
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
This article investigates in two ways the use and reporting of marker variables to detect common method variance (CMV) in organizational research. First, a review of 398 empirical articles and 41 unpublished dissertations that employ marker variables indicates that authors are not reporting adequate information regarding marker variable choice and use, are choosing inappropriate marker variables, and are possibly making errors in their assessment of CMV effects. Second, two data sets are presented that investigate the properties of six prospective markers to assess the degree to which they capture specific, measurable causes of CMV and the conclusions these markers produce when applied to substantive relationships. Results from the review and empirical investigation are used to expand the set of conditions scholars should consider when determining whether to employ a marker technique over other alternatives for detecting and controlling CMV and how best to do so.
引用
收藏
页码:473 / 511
页数:39
相关论文
共 61 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1964, APPROVAL MOTIVE STUD
  • [2] Response styles in marketing research: A cross-national investigation
    Baumgartner, H
    Steenkamp, JBEM
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, 2001, 38 (02) : 143 - 156
  • [3] Bearden W.O., 2010, Handbook of marketing scales: Multi-item measures for marketing and consumer behavior research, V3rd
  • [4] Overclaiming as a measure of faking
    Bing, Mark N.
    Kluemper, Don
    Davison, H. Kristl
    Taylor, Shannon
    Novicevic, Milorad
    [J]. ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 2011, 116 (01) : 148 - 162
  • [5] Measuring implicit content and processes at work: A new frontier within the organizational sciences
    Bowling, Nathan A.
    Johnson, Russell E.
    [J]. HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2013, 23 (03) : 203 - 204
  • [6] What Is Method Variance and How Can We Cope With It? A Panel Discussion
    Brannick, Michael T.
    Chan, David
    Conway, James M.
    Lance, Charles E.
    Spector, Paul E.
    [J]. ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2010, 13 (03) : 407 - 420
  • [7] BRUNER GC, 1994, MARKETING SCALES HDB, V1
  • [8] THE ROLE OF NEGATIVE AFFECTIVITY IN UNDERSTANDING RELATIONS BETWEEN SELF-REPORTS OF STRESSORS AND STRAINS - A COMMENT ON THE APPLIED-PSYCHOLOGY LITERATURE
    BURKE, MJ
    BRIEF, AP
    GEORGE, JM
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1993, 78 (03) : 402 - 412
  • [9] Butts MM, 2006, ACAD MANAGEMENT P, V2006, pD1, DOI [10.5465/AMBPP.2006.27182126, DOI 10.5465/AMBPP.2006.27182126]
  • [10] Chan D, 2009, STATISTICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL MYTHS AND URBAN LEGENDS: DOCTRINE, VERITY AND FABLE IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES, P309