Common-method variance
 | This article, Common-method variance, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |
| This article, Common-method variance, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |
- Thank you for your review. You made a good point. I have now specified the field of study. Please proofread the text as English is not my mother language. Common-method bias should redirect here. 85.179.138.248 (talk) 21:11, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
In science (e.g. social sciences and psychometrics), common-method variance is a specific type of variance those are confronted with who are analyzing statistical data. It has been defined by Podsakoff et al. (2003) as “variance that is attributable to the measurement method rather than to the constructs the measures represent”[1] or, more recently, by Richardson et al. (2009) as “systematic error variance shared among variables measured with and introduced as a function of the same method and/or source”[2].
Remedies
Ex-ante remedies
Several ex-ante remedies exist that help to avoid or minimize possible common-method variance. Important remedies have been collected by Chang et al. (2010).[3]
Ex-post remedies
Using simulated data sets, Richardson et al. (2009) invesitigate three ex-post techniques to test for common-method variance: the correlational marker technique, the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) marker technique, and the unmeasured latent method construct (ULMC) technique. Only the CFA marker technique turns out to provide some value.[2] A comprehensive example of this technique has been demonstrated by Williams et al. (2010).[4]
Links
References
- ^ 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.
- ^ a b Richardson, H.A., Simmering, M.J., Sturman, M.C., 2009. A tale of three perspectives: Examining post hoc statistical techniques for detection and correction of common method variance. Organizational Research Methods 12, 762-800.
- ^ Chang, S.-J., van Witteloostuijn, A., Eden, L., 2010. Common method variance in international business research. J Int Bus Stud 41, 178-184.
- ^ Williams, L.J., Hartman, N., Cavazotte, F., 2010. Method variance and marker variables: A review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organizational Research Methods 13, 477-514.
 | This statistics-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |