The Threat of Common Method Variance Bias to Theory Building

The need for more theory building scholarship remains one of the pressing issues in the field of HRD. Researchers can employ quantitative, qualitative, and/or mixed methods to support vital theory-building efforts, understanding however that each approach has its limitations. The purpose of this article is to explore common method variance bias as one of the possible major threats to the validity of quantitative research findings upon which significant theory building relies. Common method variance has been shown to introduce systematic bias into a study by artificially inflating or deflating correlations, thereby threatening the validity of conclusions drawn about the links between constructs. Both procedural design and statistical control solutions are provided to minimize its likelihood in studies with monomethod designs. Finally, editors and reviewers are called upon to support knowledge-building about how best to handle common method variance bias in quantitative studies.

[1]  P. M. Podsakoff,et al.  Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects , 1986 .

[2]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[3]  Marcia J. Simmering,et al.  A Tale of Three Perspectives , 2009 .

[4]  R. Torraco Challenges and choices for theoretical research in human resource development , 2004 .

[5]  Steven G. Rogelberg,et al.  Nonresponse to Mailed Surveys , 1998 .

[6]  C. Moorman,et al.  Cross-Sectional versus Longitudinal Survey Research: Concepts, Findings, and Guidelines , 2008 .

[7]  Larry J. Williams,et al.  Method Variance in Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Research: Effects on Correlations, Path Coefficients, and Hypothesis Testing , 1994 .

[8]  T. Kline,et al.  Common Method Variance and Specification Errors: A Practical Approach to Detection , 2000, The Journal of psychology.

[9]  James E. Bartlett,et al.  Analysis of Nonresponse Bias in Research for Business Education. , 2008 .

[10]  Thomas A Trikalinos,et al.  Meta-analysis methods. , 2008, Advances in genetics.

[11]  Bruce Thompson,et al.  "Statistical," "practical", and "clinical": How many kinds of significance do counselors need to consider? , 2002 .

[12]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1959, Psychological bulletin.

[13]  A. Burton-Jones Minimizing Method Bias Through Programmatic Research , 2009 .

[14]  Naresh K. Malhotra,et al.  Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[15]  William H. Glick,et al.  Common Methods Bias: Does Common Methods Variance Really Bias Results? , 1998 .

[16]  Jamie L. Callahan,et al.  Making Subjective Judgments in Quantitative Studies: The Importance of Using Effect Sizes and Confidence Intervals. , 2006 .

[17]  Paul E. Spector Method Variance in Organizational Research , 2006 .