What Is Method Variance and How Can We Cope With It? A Panel Discussion

By Michael T. Brannick, David Chan, J. Conway, C. Lance, Paul E. Spector. 2010

300 citations recorded by the source corpus.

A panel of experts describes the nature of, and remedies for, method variance. In an attempt to help the reader understand the nature of method variance, the authors describe their experiences with method variance both on the giving and the receiving ends of the editorial review process, as well as their interpretation of other reviewers’ comments. They then describe methods of data analysis and research design, which have been used for detecting and eliminating the effects of method variance. Most methods have some utility, but none prevent the researcher from making faulty inferences. The authors conclude with suggestions for resolving disputes about method variance.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e5f019ae76ca8ee97f1182e64d53b7923662f773

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Working Memory: Theories, Models, and Controversies (2015, unknown): “This is a problem because it can lead to erroneous perceptions about convergent validity (Baumgartner & Steenkamp 2001, Lance in Brannick et al. 2010, Williams al.”
Employee work–life balance outcomes in Ireland: a multilevel investigation of supervisory support and perceived organizational support (2013, background): “Moreover, as suggested by Lindell and Whitney ( 2001 ) and Spector (Brannick, Chan, Conway, Lance and Spector 2010 ), an inspection of the correlation matrix reveals several very low (or zero) zero-order correlations, further indicating that common method variance was not a large concern when inter”
Measuring entrepreneurial passion: Conceptual foundations and scale validation (2013, methodology): “Building on the work of Brannick et al. (2010) and Williams et al. (2010), we tested for the presence of possible commonmethod bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003) by comparing a series of models that included a marker variable thought to be unrelated to EP's dimensions and domains — in this case, a…”
Common Method Variance in Advertising Research: When to Be Concerned and How to Control for It (2017, methodology): “data sets that were analyzed, which were originally published in Spector (1987) and Williams, Cote, and Buckley (1989); showed that method effects can be multiplicative in addition to being additive If CMV is suspected of having”