Cross-Sectional versus longitudinal survey research: concepts, findings, and guidelines
Abstract
Marketing academics and practitioners frequently employ cross-sectional surveys. In recent years, editors, reviewers, and authors have expressed increasing concern about the validity of this approach. These validity concerns center on reducing common method variance bias and enhancing causal inferences. Longitudinal data collection is commonly offered as a solution to these problems. In this article, the authors conceptually examine the role of longitudinal surveys in addressing these validity concerns. Then, they provide an illustrative comparison of the validity of cross-sectional versus longitudinal surveys using two data sets and a Monte Carlo simulation. The conceptualization and findings suggest that under certain conditions, the results from cross-sectional data exhibit validity comparable to the results obtained from longitudinal data. This article concludes by offering a set of guidelines to assist researchers in deciding whether to employ a longitudinal survey approach.
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?
Given the cross-sectional design, all estimated path coefficients should be interpreted as predictive associations rather than causal relationships.
“Given the cross-sectional design of this study, all estimated path coefficients should be interpreted as predictive associations rather than causal relationships.”
From Understanding consumer purchase intention in social media influencer marketing: the mediating role of parasocial relationship and trust in the Moroccan context (2026) · cites this paper as Rindfleisch et al., 2008
The cross-sectional design does not allow for causal inference, so all relationships are interpreted as associations and predictive effects rather than causal links.
“First, the cross-sectional design does not allow for causal inference.All relationships are interpreted as associations and predictive effects rather than causal links (Rindfleisch et al., 2008).”
From Understanding consumer purchase intention in social media influencer marketing: the mediating role of parasocial relationship and trust in the Moroccan context (2026) · cites this paper as Rindfleisch et al., 2008
Cites
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 · see citing works
Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920638601200408 · Cited by 17,102 · see citing works
A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549 · see citing works
The Environment and Disease: Association or Causation?
Hill, A. B. (1965) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine · doi:10.1177/003591576505800503 · Cited by 6,974 · see citing works
The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits
Hansen, M. T. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667032 · Cited by 5,809 · see citing works
Statistics and Causal Inference
Holland, P. W. (1986) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1986.10478354 · Cited by 5,293 · see citing works
The use of pledges to build and sustain commitment in distribution channels
Anderson, E., & Weitz, B. (1992) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224379202900103 · Cited by 3,431 · see citing works
Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224379202900303 · Cited by 1,901 · see citing works
Self-citationLack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: reality or artifact?
Williams, L. J., Cote, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (1989) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.462 · Cited by 1,616 · see citing works
Common methods bias: does common methods variance really bias results?
Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H. (1998) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/109442819814002 · Cited by 1,380 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452 · Cited by 15,744 · see citing works
Schilke, O. (2014) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2099 · Cited by 1,264 · see citing works
Hulland, J., Baumgartner, H., & Smith, K. M. (2018) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-017-0532-y · Cited by 1,067 · see citing works
Understanding the Marketing Department's Influence within the Firm
Verhoef, P. C., & Leeflang, P. S. H. (2009) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.73.2.14 · Cited by 587 · see citing works
Mani, V., Gunasekaran, A., & Delgado, C. (2018) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.10.025 · Cited by 408 · see citing works
A systematic literature review of empirical research in Lean and Six Sigma in healthcare
Henrique, D. B., & Godinho Filho, M. (2020) · Total Quality Management & Business Excellence · doi:10.1080/14783363.2018.1429259 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
A literature review of empirical research methodology in lean manufacturing
Vamsi Krishna Jasti, N., & Kodali, R. (2014) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/ijopm-04-2012-0169 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Unraveling scientific impact: Citation types in marketing journals
Stremersch, S., Camacho, N., Vanneste, S., & Verniers, I. (2015) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2014.09.004 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Laschinger, H. K. S., & Read, E. A. (2016) · JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration · doi:10.1097/nna.0000000000000407 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
A manipulationist view of causality in cross-sectional survey research
Van der Stede, W. A. (2014) · Accounting Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2013.12.001 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Help me help you: How HR analytics forecasts foster organizational creativity
Di Prima, C., Cepel, M., Kotaskova, A., & Ferraris, A. (2024) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123540 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Gil‐Saura, I., Ruiz‐Molina, M., & Arteaga‐Moreno, F. (2011) · Industrial Management & Data Systems · doi:10.1108/02635571111137313 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Nassim, S., Soulami, M., Hasinat, I., Nassim, I., & Touate, S. (2026) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.3389/fcomm.2026.1911649
- Authors
- Rindfleisch, A., Malter, A. J., Ganesan, S., & Moorman, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
- University of Illinois Chicago (US)
- University of Arizona (US)
- Duke University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rindfleisch, Aric
- Malter, Alan J.
- Ganesan, Shankar
- Moorman, Christine
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 261-279
- ISSN
- 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7193
- OpenAlex
- W1966842282
- Cited by
- 1,305
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 178 · 2025: 169 · 2024: 111 · 2023: 92 · 2022: 82 · 2021: 83 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 51 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 49 · 2012: 44
- FWCI
- 107.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Marketing Research (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Business Strategies and Management Research
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Keywords
- cross-sectional survey, longitudinal survey, common method variance, measurement validity, causal inference, survey design, marketing research methodology, Monte Carlo simulation
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
