The DOI matches its Crossref record; 88 of the 88 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Common Methods Bias: Does Common Methods Variance Really Bias Results?
Abstract
Methods variance and its effects are at the center of a debate in organizational science. Most of the debate, however, is focused on the prevalence of common methods variance and ignores common methods bias, or the divergence between observed and true relationships among constructs. This article assesses the level of common methods bias in all multitrait-multimethod correlation matrices published over a 12-year period in a set of six social science journals using a combination of structural equation modeling and meta-analysis. The results indicate that only 46% of the variation in measures is attributable to the constructs, that 32% of the observed variation in measures is attributable to common methods variance, and that common methods variance results in a 26% bias in the observed relationships among constructs. This level of bias is cause for concern but does not invalidate many research findings.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“To help mitigate concerns about effects of transient sources of common method bias, we employed a lagged longitudinal design (Study 2; Doty and Glick, 1998;Podsakoff et al., 2003;Spector, 2006).”
From Work hard or play hard: the effect of leisure crafting on opportunity recognition and venture performance (2023) · cites this paper as Doty and Glick, 1998
Citations
Cites
Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 · Cited by 24,532
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 19,933
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
The Handbook of Social Psychology
Gravatt, A. E., Lindzey, G. E., & Aronson, F. (1969) · The Family Coordinator · doi:10.2307/582242 · Cited by 12,518
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
Wasserman, S. S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,377
Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7 · Cited by 8,962
LISREL 7 : user's reference guide
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1989) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 6,783
A Social Information Processing Approach to Job Attitudes and Task Design
Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392563 · Cited by 4,372
Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis
(1985) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-03396-0 · Cited by 2,564
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- 10.1177/002224378702400307 · DOI
- Campbell, D. T., 1982, New directions for methodology of social and behavioral science: Forms of validity in research, 93
- Doty, D. H., Annual Meetings of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology
- Doty, D. H., National Meetings of the Academy of Management
- Fiske, D. W., 1982, New directions for methodology of social and behavioral science: Forms of validity in research, 77
- 10.2307/256218 · DOI
- Hackman, J. R., 1980, Work redesign
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 901–1,000 of 1,000
Market orientation and enterprise policy
O’Sullivan, D., & Butler, P. J. (2009) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/03090560910989920 · Cited by 13
Chen, I. J., Lee, Y., & Paulraj, A. (2014) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.910622 · Cited by 13
“Since a single factor did not emerge and the first factor did not account for most of the variance, it is concluded that CMV may not be an issue (Doty and Glick 1998; Podsakoff et al. 2003).”
BackgroundMcDermott, M. S., & Sharma, R. (2017) · Health Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/17437199.2017.1339568 · Cited by 13
“The multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) technique (Campbell & Fiske, 1959) has long been held as the gold standard for evaluating the effect of method bias (Doty & Glick, 1998).”
BackgroundMethodVoltmer, J.-B., Voltmer, E., & Deller, J. (2018) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph15071521 · Cited by 15
Holtgrave, M., Nienaber, A., Tzafrir, S. S., & Schewe, G. (2019) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12350 · Cited by 13
Simbula, S., Mazzetti, G., & Guglielmi, D. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11195183 · Cited by 14
“However, the longitudinal design of our research reduces the risks of common method bias [66].”
Determinants of EDI Adoption and Integration by U.S. and Japanese Automobile Suppliers
Kurokawa, S., Manabe, S., & Rassameethes, B. (2008) · Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce · doi:10.1080/10919390701807459 · Cited by 13
“We designed the survey to use as many formative indicators as possible so that the cognitive complexity of the judgments that a respondent must make to answer a scale item could be reduced [53].”
MethodSo, K. K. F., Li, J., & Kim, H. (2025) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2025.2578656 · Cited by 12
Mamo, Y., Agyemang, K. J. A., & Andrew, D. P. S. (2021) · Journal of Global Sport Management · doi:10.1080/24704067.2021.1928532 · Cited by 12
“In order to control method bias, the questionnaire was divided into three parts, and respondents were provided with a brief introduction to each section, with items presented in randomized order (Doty & Glick, 1998).”
MethodKnowledge Integration and Organisational Performance of Data Analytics in the Family Business
Barros‐Contreras, I., Morales-Serazzi, M., Torres-Toukoumidis, Á., & Palma-Ruiz, J. M. (2022) · Journal of Open Innovation Technology Market and Complexity · doi:10.3390/joitmc8030135 · Cited by 14
“The subjective assessment of the key informants, however, was acknowledged as a potential limitation that may be related to common method bias [74].”
MethodBrand commitment as predecessor to the factors of continuance intention
Amoroso, D. L., & Ackaradejruangsri, P. (2024) · Journal of Marketing Analytics · doi:10.1057/s41270-024-00333-y · Cited by 12
A STUDY OF ORGANISATIONAL DETERMINANTS AND INNOVATION PRACTICES IN DUBAI SMEs
Al-Ansari, Y., Xu, J., & Pervan, S. (2014) · International Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1142/s1363919614500030 · Cited by 12
Lee, J., & Park, M.-C. (2012) · Information Systems and e-Business Management · doi:10.1007/s10257-012-0200-1 · Cited by 12
“There is much academic debate on the real effect of CMB. Doty and Glick (1998) explained that common method variance results in a 26 % bias in the observed relationships among constructs and that this level of bias may not invalidate research findings, while Podsakoff et al. (2003) showed a low…”
BackgroundCommon Method Variance in International Business Research: A Commentary
Doty, D. H., & Astakhova, M. N. (2019) · JIBS special collections · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-22113-3_21 · Cited by 12
Self-citationPratolo, S., Mukti, A. H., & Sofyani, H. (2021) · Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi dan Bisnis · doi:10.24815/jdab.v8i1.19116 · Cited by 12
Managerial Perception of Human Capital, Innovations, and Performance: Evidence from Banking Industry
Milosevic, N., Dobrota, M., Dmitrovic, V., & Barjaktarovic Rakocevic, S. (2021) · Engineering Economics · doi:10.5755/j01.ee.32.5.26032 · Cited by 12
“CMB is observed through the presence of a systematic variance (Bagozzi & Yi, 1990) that can inflate or deflate a relationship among variables (Doty & Glick, 1998) which can lead to unsound conclusions.”
BackgroundThibault, T., Thompson, K., Keough, M. T., Krank, M. D., Conrod, P., Moore, M., & Stewart, S. H. (2022) · Stress and Health · doi:10.1002/smi.3175 · Cited by 12
“The current study relied on cross‐sectional, self‐report data increasing the likelihood of common method variance (CMV which can inflate relationships artificially or otherwise bias the data in some way; Doty & Glick, 1998; Lindell & Whitney, 2001; Malhotra et al., 2017).”
MethodWang, Y., Liu, D., & Li, C. (2023) · Journal of Career Assessment · doi:10.1177/10690727231200255 · Cited by 13
“Both the values fell below 40%, suggesting the bias issue was not severe (Doty & Glick, 1998).”
BackgroundFan, Y. W., & Lance, C. E. (2016) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164416677144 · Cited by 12
“…not be a problem were it not for the fact that several large-scale reviews of MTMMrelated research have estimated mean Method correlations at .34 (Doty & Glick, 1998), .37 (Buckley, Cote, & Comstock, 1990), .48 (Cote & Buckley, 1987), .52 (Lance et al., 2010), and .63 (Williams, Cote, & Buckley,…”
BackgroundA Test of Perceptual Accuracy and Overconfidence in a Strategic Issue Context
Sund, K. J. (2016) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s2397-52102016012 · Cited by 12
“Common method bias is a real risk in this type of study, due to the same respondent providing data for both the explanatory and explained variables (Doty and Glick, 1998).”
MethodPalgi, Y. (2013) · Anxiety Stress & Coping · doi:10.1080/10615806.2013.784901 · Cited by 12
Bjørnstad, A. L., & Ulleberg, P. (2021) · Leadership & Organization Development Journal · doi:10.1108/lodj-06-2020-0255 · Cited by 13
Attachment and Work Engagement in Virtual Teams: Promoting Collaborative Job Crafting
Goel, R., Game, A., & Sanz‐Vergel, A. I. (2022) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/10464964221121801 · Cited by 19
“Additionally, the outcome variable, work engagement, was measured twice, which may have further diminished the possibility of common method bias (Doty & Glick, 1998).”
MethodMao, Y., Guo, S., Xie, M., Yu, J., Deng, X., Li, Y., Zhai, Y., & Kong, F. (2023) · Journal of Managerial Psychology · doi:10.1108/jmp-07-2022-0355 · Cited by 13
Effects of Authentic Leadership, Behavioral Integrity, and Project Governance on Project Performance
Cao, Q. R., Swain, A. K., Sirisomboonsuk, P., & Gu, V. C. (2024) · Project Management Journal · doi:10.1177/87569728241231936 · Cited by 14
“Extra efforts were made in the survey design to protect the anonymity of the respondents (Doty & Glick, 1998) and to clearly separate items measuring different variables in the questionnaire to further alleviate the common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003).”
Cao, Q. R., Elking, I., Gu, V. C., & Hoffman, J. J. (2024) · Journal of Enterprise Information Management · doi:10.1108/jeim-07-2023-0385 · Cited by 12
Hamrick, A. B., Murnieks, C. Y., & Waddingham, J. A. (2024) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115078 · Cited by 12
Kim, T. T., Kim, W. G., Majeed, S., & Roh, H. (2025) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2025.104152 · Cited by 11
Networking for better information-gathering performance at trade shows: A multigroup analysis
Li, Q., He, H., Sun, J., & Leung, X. Y. (2022) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2022.04.015 · Cited by 11
Tasavori, M., & Bhattarai, C. R. (2022) · International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research · doi:10.1108/ijebr-12-2021-1009 · Cited by 11
Unveiling the effects of supply chain relationship types on enterprise performance
Li, L. (2023) · Enterprise Information Systems · doi:10.1080/17517575.2023.2274141 · Cited by 11
“According to this method, if common method bias exists, then either (1) a single factor will emerge from a factor analysis of all survey items (Podsakoff and Organ 1986), or (2) one general factor accounting for most of the common variance existing in the data will emerge (Doty and Glick 1998).”
MethodThe importance of emotional display rules for employee well-being: A multi-group comparison
Ybema, J. F., & van Dam, K. (2014) · The Journal of Positive Psychology · doi:10.1080/17439760.2014.898319 · Cited by 12
“Furthermore, some research has shown that common method variance generally is not robust enough to invalidate research findings from studies with a single source and method (Doty & Glick, 1998).”
MethodBynum, B. H., Hoffman, B. J., Meade, A. W., & Gentry, W. A. (2012) · Journal of Business and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10869-012-9272-7 · Cited by 11
Managerial skills shortages and the impending effects of organizational characteristics
Bhanugopan, R., Wang, Y., Lockhart, P., & Farrell, M. (2017) · Personnel Review · doi:10.1108/pr-04-2016-0093 · Cited by 11
WORK AND FAMILY INTERFACE: WELLBEING AND THE ROLE OF RESILIENCE AND WORK-LIFE BALANCE
Riley, D. (2012) · Research Commons (University of Waikato) · Cited by 11
Panatik, S. A. (2010) · Research Commons (University of Waikato) · Cited by 11
Simplifying Common Method Variance Mitigation: The Role of Additional Variables
Sturman, M. C., Richardson, H. A., Simmering, M. J., & Ukhov, A. D. (2025) · Journal of Business and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10869-025-10074-z · Cited by 17
Kristensen, S. M., & Jeno, L. M. (2024) · Social Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s11218-024-09923-1 · Cited by 14
“Another limitation of this study might be the sole reliance on self-reported measures, which may lead to common method bias (Doty & Glick, 1998) and an overes-timation of the associations between the study variables.”
How to Capture the Rage? Development and Validation of a State-Trait Anger Scale
Umbra, R., & Fasbender, U. (2024) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2024.2390990 · Cited by 11
“It is imperative to note that our findings from Study 3 should not be taken as evidence for causality (Doty & Glick, 1998).”
InfluentialHom, P. W., Rogers, K. M., Allen, D. G., Zhang, M., Lee, C., & Zhao, H. H. (2024) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.22250 · Cited by 14
Salesmanship: the influence of social networks on sales-service ambidexterity
Xiao-yong, Z. (2022) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/md-01-2022-0038 · Cited by 10
Karkonasasi, K., Cheah, Y., Vadiveloo, M., & Mousavi, S. A. (2023) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines11081331 · Cited by 11
Are positive learning experiences levers for lifelong learning among low educated workers
Sanders, J., Damen, M., & van Dam, K. (2015) · Evidence-based HRM a Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship · doi:10.1108/ebhrm-01-2014-0002 · Cited by 12
Al-Ansari, Y., Pervan, S., & Xu, J. (2014) · International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management · doi:10.1142/s0219877014500394 · Cited by 10
Organizational learning in the P hilippines: how do team and individual learning contribute?
Dayaram, K., & Fung, L. (2014) · Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources · doi:10.1111/1744-7941.12039 · Cited by 13
van Veldhoven, M. J. P. M., Dorenbosch, L. W., Breugelmans, A., & Voorde, K. V. D. (2017) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/2158244017721734 · Cited by 12
Meisler, G. (2020) · International Public Management Journal · doi:10.1080/10967494.2020.1720051 · Cited by 10
“Self-report data raise concerns about common method bias and social desirability bias, though some scholars have argued that common method bias does not invalidate most research findings (Crampton and Wagner 1994; Doty and Glick 1998).”
BackgroundAbbas, W., & Wu, W. (2021) · Review of Business Management · doi:10.7819/rbgn.v23i1.4094 · Cited by 10
“Our study already incorporated procedural remedies; for example, as we provided assurance for confidentiality and anonymity (Konrad & Linnehan, 1995) and used validated scales, the results were less sensitive to potential bias (Doty & Glick, 1998).”
MethodÖztürk, E. B., & Emirza, S. (2021) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/apps.12334 · Cited by 10
Attitudes toward Working Single Parents: Initial Development of a Measure
Noble, C. L., Eby, L. T. D. T., Lockwood, A. L., & Allen, T. D. (2004) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164404264844 · Cited by 10
“First, the research design, though psychometrically stringent, utilized self-report items to measure all variables in the study and is therefore vulnerable to the potential difficulties caused by common method variance (Campbell & Fiske, 1959; Doty & Glick, 1998).”
BackgroundMethodAbulaiti, G., Frank, B., Enkawa, T., & Schvaneveldt, S. J. (2011) · Journal of Marketing Channels · doi:10.1080/1046669x.2011.613323 · Cited by 10
“To reduce and detect common method variance in our data, we varied the question anchors across our scales (Doty & Glick, 1998 ), used single-item scales (Bergkvist & Rossiter, 2007 ; Drolet & Morrison, 2001 ), and added a question on the amount of stress (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005 ), which is theoretically unrelated t…”
MethodAvery, S. L., Swafford, P. M., & Prater, E. L. (2014) · Operations Management Research · doi:10.1007/s12063-014-0087-8 · Cited by 10
“This technique assumes there is CMB if a single factor is present, or one factor accounts for most of the variance (Doty and Glick 1998; Podsakoff and Organ 1986).”
Emotional Labor and Burnout: The Moderating Effect of Autonomy and Social Supports
Kim, W.-H., 이종현, 허창구, & Shin, K. (2007) · Korean Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.17315/kjhp.2007.12.4.014 · Cited by 10
Corporate social and environmental reporting : a user perspective
Wong, R. (2012) · The University of Bath Online Publications Store (The University of Bath) · Cited by 10
Gunasegaran, M. (2011) · eSpace (Curtin University) · Cited by 10
The Influence of Line Managers and HR Department on Employees’ Affective CommitmentPreprint
Gilbert, C., Winne, S. D., & Sels, L. (2010) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1658364 · Cited by 10
Riyadi, N., Asakarunia, D. A., Wijaya, F., & Riantoputra, C. D. (2019) · Leading for High Performance in Asia · doi:10.1007/978-981-13-6074-9_4 · Cited by 9
Occupational burnout and their determinants among schoolteachers in Nepal: a cross-sectional study
Paudel, N. R., Prakash, K. C., Ghimire, R., Nygård, C., & Neupane, S. (2024) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-024-05923-9 · Cited by 21
“The study relied on a self-reported web-based survey, which may have influenced participant responses and introduced a potential bias [61].”
Acquisition integration capabilities and organizational design
Bauer, F., King, D. R., Friesl, M., Schriber, S., & Weng, Q. D. (2024) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2024.102479 · Cited by 9
Xie, C., Zhu, J., Xie, Y., Yan, J., & Liang, C. (2025) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.70008 · Cited by 9
Association between depression and asthma: insight from observational and genetic evidence
Ji, T., Lv, Y., Yang, J., Diao, X., & Gu, J. (2025) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-025-07245-w · Cited by 9
“Nonetheless, the impact of such biases can be minimized through the multiple data collection approaches, enhanced participant instruction, standardized assessment tools, and data verification procedures [93].”
Wang, C., Chang, C., & Lee, Z. C. R. (2022) · Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management · doi:10.1108/jmtm-07-2021-0253 · Cited by 9
Czakert, J. P., & Berger, R. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph192315984 · Cited by 9
“In organizational research, common method variance is estimated to cause about 26% bias in the observed relationships of constructs [85].”
MethodBarkema, H. G., Coyle‐Shapiro, J. A., & le Grand, E. M. (2023) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2021.1244 · Cited by 11
Wang, X., Howard, J. L., & Zhong, L. (2024) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/apps.12563 · Cited by 9
Founding logics, technology validation, and the path to commercialization
Ciuchta, M. P., Miner, A. S., Kim, J.-Y., & O’Toole, J. (2017) · International Small Business Journal Researching Entrepreneurship · doi:10.1177/0266242617741534 · Cited by 9
“The concrete nature of our dependent variables also mitigates the presence of common methods bias (Doty and Glick, 1998: 380).”
MethodLebek, B., Guhr, N., & Breitner, M. H. (2014) · International Conference on Information Systems · Cited by 9
Mahlendorf, M. D., & Wallenburg, C. M. (2013) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/jasp.12177 · Cited by 9
de Guinea, A. O., Titah, R., Léger, P., & Micheneau, T. (2012) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.1109/hicss.2012.448 · Cited by 9
“Mono-method bias occurs when the measurement technique introduces systematic variance into the measures; that is, biases estimates of the true relationships among constructs [910, 19].”
BackgroundGonzález‐Torre, P. L., Sarkis, J., & Adenso-Dı́az, B. (2013) · International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics · doi:10.1504/ijstl.2013.054193 · Cited by 9
Pre-traumatic, trauma- and treatment-related determinants of self-rated health after a severe trauma
Janßen, C., Ommen, O., Pfaff, H., Lefering, R. L., & Neugebauer, E. A. M. (2009) · Langenbeck s Archives of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00423-008-0458-4 · Cited by 9
Leadership Emergence and Group Development: A Longitudinal Examination of Project Teams
Bergman, S. M., Small, E. E., Bergman, J. Z., & Bowling, J. J. (2014) · Cited by 9
Applying career concepts to strengthen the work-attitudes of service professionals
Walsh, K. (2016) · Service Industries Journal · doi:10.1080/02642069.2016.1155115 · Cited by 9
“While results do not completely rule out the presence of common method bias, they do suggest that the likelihood of bias confounding the results is low (Doty & Glick, 1998).”
ResultEstryn-Behar, M. R., Nézet, O. L., HEIJDEN, B. I. J. M. V. D., Ogińska, H., Camerino, D., Conway, P. M., Fry, C., & Hasselhorn, H. M. (2007) · Jagiellonian University Repository (Jagiellonian University) · Cited by 9
The Instructional Skills Workshop as a Transformative Learning Process
Macpherson, A. (2011) · Arca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network) · doi:10.13140/2.1.4296.7685 · Cited by 9
Farquhar, S. S. (2011) · Wolverhampton Intellectual Repository and E-Theses (University of Wolverhampton) · Cited by 9
A Critique of the Marker Variable Technique: The Effect of Alternative Marker Variable Criteria
Sharma, R., Yetton, P., & Crawford, J. (2010) · Research Online (University of Wollongong) · Cited by 9
“It’s Not the CEOs, It’s Us”: On the Challenges of CEO Research and a Call for Deeper Engagement
Bourgoin, A., & Harms, P. D. (2024) · Group & Organization Management · doi:10.1177/10596011241254150 · Cited by 8
“…dependent variables, and construct misspeci fi cation and poor operationalization, all of which can serve to in fl ate, de fl ate, or produce spurious intercorrelations (Cred´e, 2010; DeSimone et al., 2015, 2018; Doty & Glick, 1998; Liu, 2022; Mõttus, 2016; Podsakoff et al., 2003; Wood & Harms, 2016).”
Chen, L., Li, Q., Lv, Y., & Mohiuddin, M. (2024) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.143918 · Cited by 10
Blomkvist, K., Engzell, J. V., Kappen, P., & Zander, I. (2024) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115155 · Cited by 8
Common method variance (CMV) bias: its implications, how to detect it, and how to handle it
Andersen, R., Thomakos, D. D., & Wood, G. (2025) · Human Resource Development International · doi:10.1080/13678868.2025.2537161 · Cited by 10
Physical and Mental Health of Sexually Abused Boys: a 5 Year Matched-Control and Cohort Study
Daigneault, I., Bourgeois, C., Vézina-Gagnon, P., Poirier, A. A., Dargan, S., Hébert, M., & Frappier, J. (2016) · Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma · doi:10.1007/s40653-016-0120-1 · Cited by 8
Wu, S., & Ding, X. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2024.3374238 · Cited by 8
“If common method bias exists, this test will reveal a single factor from a factor analysis of all survey items, or one general factor that accounts for most of the common variance [69].”
MethodBarlage, M., van den Born, A., van Witteloostuijn, A. C., & Graham, L. (2014) · Policy Studies · doi:10.1080/01442872.2013.875154 · Cited by 12
“Such variance may lead to serious bias in parameter estimation (Doty and Glick 1998).”
BackgroundMethodMathuramay, C. (2012) · International Business Management · doi:10.3923/ibm.2012.451.457 · Cited by 8
Promoting synergistic innovation in logistics service outsourcing
Wang, X., Wang, X., & Linzan, R. (2020) · Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing · doi:10.1108/jbim-08-2019-0385 · Cited by 8
Navigating challenging contexts: Costs and benefits of codified acquisition experience
Bauer, F., King, D. R., Schriber, S., & Kruckenhauser, C. (2021) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2021.102088 · Cited by 8
Zhang, Y., Hu, Z., Tian, S. I. P., Zhou, C., & Ding, Y. C. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1013416 · Cited by 9
Armstrong, D. J., & Riemenschneider, C. K. (2011) · Cited by 8
Acculturation to the global culture and internet adoption
Ayouby, R., Croteau, A., & Raymond, L. (2012) · ACM SIGMIS Database the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems · doi:10.1145/2398834.2398838 · Cited by 8
“First, measuring all variables through a self-administered questionnaire may pose a risk of common method variance and lead to an overestimation of the relationships between attitudinal and behavioral constructs (Doty & Glick, 1998).”
BackgroundBarbier, M., Monseur, C., Bertrand, F., & Hansez, I. (2012) · Psychologica Belgica · doi:10.5334/pb-52-1-3 · Cited by 8
What do we need from intermediaries for technology transfer to China? A European firm perspective
Li‐Ying, J. (2012) · Prometheus · doi:10.1080/08109028.2012.661553 · Cited by 8
“We followed procedures suggested by Doty and Glick (1998) and found no common method bias.”
MethodFrom Innovative I.S. Strategy to Customer Value
Chen, D. Q., Preston, D. S., & Tarafdar, M. (2015) · ACM SIGMIS Database the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems · doi:10.1145/2795618.2795620 · Cited by 8
“If this bias exists then a single factor would emerge (Podsakoff et al., 2003), or majority of the variance would be explained by one factor (Doty and Glick, 1998).”
BackgroundAge Climate : age stereotypes in organizations and older workers
Noack, C. M. G. (2009) · Cited by 8
The Influence of Demographic Factors on What People Want from their Leaders
Posner, B. Z. (2018) · Journal of Leadership Studies · doi:10.1002/jls.21553 · Cited by 8
Common Method Variance und Single Source Bias
Söhnchen, F. (2007) · Gabler eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-8349-9121-8_10 · Cited by 8
Lo, F. (2015) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.06.017 · Cited by 8
A Perceptual Measure of the Degree of Development of Proprietary Equipment
Cua, K. O., Junttila, M. A., & Schroeder, R. G. (2002) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0904_7 · Cited by 8
“Doty and Glick (1998), in the most recent latest meta-analysis of common methodsbias inorganizational research,concluded that“commonmethodsvariance is an important concern for organizational scientists” (p. 399).”
BackgroundMethodPersonal and professional leadership in a government agency
Eddy, E. R., Lorenzet, S. J., & Mastrangelo, A. (2008) · Leadership & Organization Development Journal · doi:10.1108/01437730810887021 · Cited by 8
The Influence of Strategic Learning Practices on Employee CommitmentPreprint
Tseng, C. (2011) · SSRN Electronic Journal · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H.
- Affiliations
- Syracuse University (US)
- Arizona State University (US)
- ORCID
- Doty, D. Harold
- Venue
- Organizational Research Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1998-10
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 374-406
- ISSN
- 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7425
- OpenAlex
- W2168082050
- Cited by
- 1,380
- References
- 84
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 64 · 2020: 62 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 67 · 2016: 63 · 2015: 64 · 2014: 95 · 2013: 89 · 2012: 92
- FWCI
- 9.20
- 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
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Business Strategies and Management Research
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- measurement bias, construct relationships, measurement error, organizational analysis
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
