The biasing effect of common method variance: some clarifications

Hans Baumgartner (), Bert Weijters and Rik Pieters ()
Additional contact information
Hans Baumgartner: Pennsylvania State University
Rik Pieters: Tilburg University

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2021, vol. 49, issue 2, No 1, 235 pages

Abstract: Abstract There are enduring misconceptions in the marketing and management literature about the potential biasing effects of Common Method Variance (CMV). One belief is that the biasing effect of CMV is of greater theoretical than practical importance; another belief is that if CMV is a potential problem, it can be easily identified with the Harman one-factor test. In this article, we show that both beliefs are ill founded and need correction. To demonstrate our key points with greater generality, we use analytical derivations rather than empirical simulations. First, we examine the effects of CMV on correlations between observed variables as a function of measure unreliability and the sign and size of the “true” trait correlation. We demonstrate that, for negative trait correlations, CMV leads to a substantial upward bias in observed correlations (i.e., observed correlations are less negative than the trait correlation), and under certain conditions observed correlations may even have the wrong sign (assuming that the method loadings are both positive or both negative). We also show that, for positive trait correlations, the downward bias due to measurement unreliability does not always mitigate the upward bias due to CMV (again assuming that the method loadings are either both positive or both negative). Importantly, our results indicate that the inflationary effect of CMV is larger at lower levels of (positive) trait correlations, whereas the deflationary effect of unreliability is larger at higher levels of trait correlations. Second, we demonstrate analytically the serious deficiencies of the popular Harman one-factor test for detecting common method variance and strongly recommend against its use in future research.

Keywords: Common method variance; Common method bias; Harman one-factor test; Systematic error; Unreliability of measurement (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (17)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11747-020-00766-8 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:joamsc:v:49:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s11747-020-00766-8

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.springer ... gement/journal/11747

DOI: 10.1007/s11747-020-00766-8

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science is currently edited by John Hulland, Anne Hoekman and Mark Houston

More articles in Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().