Method Variance in Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Research: Effects on Correlations, Path Coefficients, and Hypothesis Testing

Williams, Larry J., Brown, Barbara K.·1994·Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

DOI 10.1006/obhd.1994.1011

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/obhd.1994.1011

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs
Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.114 · Cited by 8,490
Common methods variance detection in business research
Fuller, C. M., Simmering, M. J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., & Babin, B. J. (2016) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008 · Cited by 3,519
Method Variance in Organizational Research: Truth or Urban Legend?
Spector, P. E. (2006) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428105284955 · Cited by 3,445
Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects.
Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. (2010) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428109351241 · Cited by 2,706
A Tale of Three Perspectives: Examining Post Hoc Statistical Techniques for Detection and Correction of Common Method Variance
Richardson, H. A., Simmering, M. J., & Sturman, M. C. (2009) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428109332834 · Cited by 1,721
Understanding Self-Report Bias in Organizational Behavior Research
Donaldson, S. I., & Grant-Vallone, E. J. (2002) · Journal of Business and Psychology · doi:10.1023/a:1019637632584 · Cited by 1,068
Consumer experiences, attitude and behavioral intention toward online food delivery (OFD) services
Yeo, V. C. S., Goh, S.-K., & Rezaei, S. (2017) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.12.013 · Cited by 956
Marker Variable Choice, Reporting, and Interpretation in the Detection of Common Method Variance: A Review and Demonstration
Simmering, M. J., Fuller, C. M., Richardson, H. A., Ocal, Y., & Atinc, G. M. (2015) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428114560023 · Cited by 734
Assessing Common Method Bias: Problems with the ULMC Technique1
Chin, W. W., Thatcher, J. B., & Wright, R. T. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41703491 · Cited by 505
A Study of the Antecedents and Consequences of Psychological Ownership in Organizational Settings
Mayhew, M. G., Ashkanasy, N. M., Bramble, T., & Gardner, J. (2007) · The Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.3200/socp.147.5.477-500 · Cited by 355
Climate of fear in organisational settings: construct definition, measurement and a test of theory
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Nicholson, G. J. (2003) · Australian Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1080/00049530412331312834 · Cited by 112
Working Conditions and Three Types of Well-Being: A Longitudinal Study With Self-Report and Rating Data.
Grebner, S., Semmer, N. K., & Elfering, A. (2005) · Journal of Occupational Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/1076-8998.10.1.31 · Cited by 93
Wording Effects in the Measurement of Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity: A Multitrait-Multimethod Analysis
Harris, M. M., & Bladen, A. (1994) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639402000409 · Cited by 33

Authors: Williams, L. J., & Brown, B. K.
Venue: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Published: 1994-02
Volume: 57
Issue: 2
Pages: 185-209
ISSN: 0749-5978 (ISSN-L)
DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1994.1011
OpenAlex: W2097744999
Cited by: 251
References: 0
FWCI: 4.55
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review