Method Effects, Measurement Error, and Substantive Conclusions

Common method variance is routinely viewed as a pervasive problem in organizational research, one that undermines good science and biases empirical conclusions. The authors review research that has used multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) designs to estimate the magnitude of common method variance in orga...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Organizational research methods 2010-07, Vol.13 (3), p.435-455
Main Authors: Lance, Charles E., Dawson, Bryan, Birkelbach, David, Hoffman, Brian J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attenuation
Empirical analysis
Error analysis
Errors
Estimates
Job satisfaction
Offsets
Research management
Variance
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Common method variance is routinely viewed as a pervasive problem in organizational research, one that undermines good science and biases empirical conclusions. The authors review research that has used multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) designs to estimate the magnitude of common method variance in organizational research. The results of this study show that method variance accounts for less variance (18%) than has been suggested by previous reviews. The authors also consider simultaneously the attenuating effect of measurement error with the inflationary effect of common method variance on observed relationships. Results indicate that although common method variance does have an inflationary effect on observed relationships, this effect is almost completely offset by the attenuating effect of measurement error.
ISSN:1094-4281
1552-7425
DOI:10.1177/1094428109352528