Beliefs and practices regarding common method variance (CMV) were surveyed from a sample of top journal board members. Results indicated that reviewers frequently mentioned CMV concerns and believed that addressing this issue in the design stage was more effective than postdata approaches. Although there was little consensus regarding whether concerns about CMV would cause them to recommend rejection of manuscripts, reviewers generally agreed that some variables were more likely than others to be affected by CMV and that a simple focus on the method of measurement was not adequate for determining whether CMV caused problems with the interpretation of study results. Slight differences were observed across journals and were related to participant experience.
Bagozzi, R.P., & Yi, Y. ( 1990). Assessing method variance in multitrait-multimethod matrices: The case of self-reported affect and perceptions at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 547-560.
2.
Becker, T.E., & Cote, J.A. ( 1994). Additive and multiplicative method effects in applied psychological research: An empirical assessment of three models. Journal of Management, 20, 625-641.
3.
Burke, M.J., Brief, A.P., & George, J.M. ( 1993). The role of negative affectivity in understanding relations between self-reports of stressors and strains: A comment on the applied psychology literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 402-412.
4.
Campbell, D.T., & Fiske, D.W. ( 1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
5.
Conway, J.M. ( 1998). Understanding method variance in multitrait-multirater performance appraisal matrices: Examples using general impressions and interpersonal affect as measured method factors. Human Performance, 11, 29-55.
6.
Doty, D.H., & Glick, W.H. ( 1998). Common methods bias: Does common methods variance really bias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1, 374-406.
7.
Fiske, D.W., & Pearson, P.H. ( 1970). Theory and techniques of personality measurement. In P. H. Mussen & M. R. Rosenzweig (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. XXI, pp. 49-86). Palo Alto: Annual Reviews, Inc.
8.
Golding, S.L. ( 1977). Method variance, inadequate constructs, or things that go bump in the night?The Journal of Multivariate Behavioral Research, 12, 89-98.
9.
Judge, T.A., & Cable, D.M. ( 2004). The effect of physical height on workplace success and income: Preliminary test of a theoretical model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 428-441.
10.
Moorman, R.H., & Podsakoff, P.M. (1992). A meta-analytic review and empirical test of the potential confounding effects of social desirability response sets in organizational behaviour research. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65, 131-149.
11.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies . Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.
12.
Scullen, S.E. ( 1999). Using confirmatory factor analysis of correlated uniquenesses to estimate method variance in multitrait-multimethod matrices. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 275-292.
Spector, P.E. ( 1987). Method variance as an artifact in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Myth or significant problem? Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 438-443.
15.
Spector, P.E. ( 2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221-232.
16.
Spector, P.E., Chen, P.Y., & O’Connell, B.J. (2000). A longitudinal study of relations between job stressors and job strains while controlling for prior negative affectivity and strains. Journal of Applied Psychology , 85, 211-218.
17.
Vandenberg, R.J. ( 2006). Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Where, pray tell, did they get this idea?Organizational Research Methods, 9, 194-201.
18.
Williams, L.J., & Anderson, S.E. (1994). An alternative approach to method effects by using latent-variable models: Applications in organizational behavior research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 323-331.
19.
Williams, L.J., & Brown, B.K. ( 1994). Method variance in organizational behavior and human resources research: Effects on correlations, path coefficients, and hypothesis testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 57, 185-209.
20.
Williams, L.J., Cote, J.A., & Buckley, M.R. ( 1989). Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Reality or artifact? Journal of Applied Psychology , 74, 462-468.
21.
Williams, L.J., Gavin, M.B., & Williams, M.L. (1996). Measurement and nonmeasurement processes with negative affectivity and employee attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 88-101.
22.
Zapf, D., Dormann, C., & Frese, M. ( 1996). Longitudinal studies in organizational stress research: A review of the literature with reference to methodological issues. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 145-169.
