Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects.
Abstract
This research analyzes the effects of common method variance (CMV) on parameter estimates in bivariate linear, multivariate linear, quadratic, and interaction regression models. The authors demonstrate that CMV can either inflate or deflate bivariate linear relationships, depending on the degree of symmetry with which CMV affects the observed measures. With respect to multivariate linear relationships, they show that common method bias generally decreases when additional independent variables suffering from CMV are included in a regression equation. Finally, they demonstrate that quadratic and interaction effects cannot be artifacts of CMV. On the contrary, both quadratic and interaction terms can be severely deflated through CMV, making them more difficult to detect through statistical means.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The use of multi-source measurement reduces concerns regarding common source variance with respect to inflating main effects and attenuating interaction effects.
“Another methodological strength was the use of multi-source measurement which reduces concerns regarding common source variance with respect to inflating the main effects found between predictors and the dependent variables as well as regarding the attenuation of the interaction effects (Siemsen et al., 2010).”
From Narcissistic Leaders and Their Victims: Followers Low on Self-Esteem and Low on Core Self-Evaluations Suffer Most (2018) · cites this paper as Siemsen et al., 2010
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 27 · Cited by 2,706
- Authors
- Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Clemson University (US)
- Universidade Católica Portuguesa (PT)
- Corresponding author
- Siemsen, Enno
- Venue
- Organizational Research Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-11-30
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 456-476
- ISSN
- 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7425
- OpenAlex
- W2130091537
- Cited by
- 2,706
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 197 · 2025: 179 · 2024: 210 · 2023: 185 · 2022: 269 · 2021: 232 · 2020: 236 · 2019: 211 · 2018: 186 · 2017: 168 · 2016: 169 · 2015: 131 · 2014: 118 · 2013: 90 · 2012: 74
- FWCI
- 55.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Organizational Research Methods (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Statistical Methods and Models
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Business Strategies and Management Research
- Keywords
- common method variance, methodological bias, quadratic effects, interaction effects, multivariate linear regression, parameter estimation bias, measurement artifacts
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