Method Variance in Organizational Research Truth or Urban Legend?
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
4-2006
Keywords
method variance, monomethod bias, measurement bias, construct validity
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105284955
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.
Was this content written or created while at USF?
Yes
Citation / Publisher Attribution
Organizational Research Methods, v. 9, issue 2, p. 221-232
Scholar Commons Citation
Spector, Paul E., "Method Variance in Organizational Research Truth or Urban Legend?" (2006). Psychology Faculty Publications. 709.
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/psy_facpub/709
