- 最后登录
- 2016-11-27
- 注册时间
- 2003-1-21
- 威望
- 250
- 金钱
- 16832
- 贡献
- 11934
- 阅读权限
- 255
- 积分
- 29016
- 日志
- 4
- 记录
- 0
- 帖子
- 1438
- 主题
- 69
- 精华
- 0
- 好友
- 380
 
- 注册时间
- 2003-1-21
- 最后登录
- 2016-11-27
- 积分
- 29016
- 精华
- 0
- 主题
- 69
- 帖子
- 1438
|
我教了方法论这么多年，podsakoff 的这篇文章我当然读过。你有兴趣的话，还可以读读下面的其他文献。这是我的课程中关于CMV的阅读要求。
; E$ X) P3 e# R, L9 b* S01. Spector, P.E., & Brannick, M.T. (2010). Common method issues: An introduction to the feature topic in organizational research methods. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 403-406.
( A+ r, L, F7 Q' x, m: c+ L' b02. Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. (2010). Common Method Bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 456-476.+ g3 y8 H, A( w9 v# _8 e) z3 D
03. Richardson, H.A., Simmering, M.J., & Sturman, M.C. (2009). A tale of three perspectives: Examining post hoc statistical techniques for detection and correction of common method variance. Organizational Research Methods, 12(4), 762-800.
5 u) u- P# }% k0 g: Y; L04. Lance, C.E., Dawson, B., Birkelbach, D., & Hoffman, B.J. (2010). Method effects, measurement error, and substantive conclusions. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3),435-455.5 o& C+ ]* F! n8 X% M) o
05. Brannick, M.T., Chan, D., Conway, J.M., Lance, C.E., & Spector, P.E. (2010). What is method variance and how can we cope with it? A panel discussion. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 407-420.
2 }0 O/ x4 S) E* I- a$ Q* N; K06. William, L.J., Hartman, N., & Cavazotte, F. (2010). Method variance and marker variables: A review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 477-514.1 Z' |4 }/ Y; U1 _
07. Pace, V.L. (2010). Method variance from the perspectives of reviewers: Poorly understood problem or overemphasized complaint? Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 421-434.7 b- U4 H" _8 n! S; J/ w/ G
08. Spector, P.E. (2008). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221-232.! W! M; Y5 d' p
09. Malhotra, N.K., Kim, S.S., & Patil, A. (2006) Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science, 52(12), 1865-1883.5 o2 b- m1 R2 \2 @( |8 V6 Y
10. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
- O3 s6 B2 h8 _( R11.Vandenberg, R.J. (2006) Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Where, pray tell, did they get this idea? Organizational Research Methods,9(2), 194-201.
+ Y* b% }% G* ^/ {: Y2 |12. Kline, T.J.B., Sulsky, L.M., & Rever-Moriyama, S.D. (2000). Common method variance and specification errors: A practical approach to detection. The Journal of Psychology, 134(4), 401-0421.3 _4 m* g9 c) T R( U9 S9 Q
13. Bollen, K.A. & Paxton, P. (1998). Detection and determinants of bias in subjective measures. American Sociological Review, 63, 465-478.. |# J: ^5 M- X$ h3 P
14. Boone, C. & Brabander, B. (1997). Self-reports and CEO locus of control research: A note. Organization Studies, 18(6), 949-971.0 g+ ~2 x, m F) |( Z" x9 P' Q( _
15. Spector, P.E. (1994). Using self-report questionnaires in OB research: A comment on the use of a controversial method. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(5), 385-392.
1 ?1 x# ~) m/ [3 n# y: R16. Williams, L.J., Cote, J.A. & Buckley, M.R. (1989). Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Reality or artifact? Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(3), 462-468.
9 o8 h2 g& I1 n, I17. Spector, P.E. (1992). A consideration of the validity and meaning of self-report measures of job conditions. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7, 123-151.) U8 g3 l, ?- e0 {7 H
18. Spector, P.E. (1987). Method variance as an artifact in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Myth or significant problem? Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3), 438-443.
5 X+ u( b9 W: e# ]* S19. Sharma, R., Yetton, P., & Crawford, J. (2009). Estimating the effect of common method variance: The method-method pair technique with an illustration from TAM research. MIS Quarterly, 33(3), 473-490.
, i( O% N" B! p" x- L% ~9 w& `' C
请不要忘记，你引的文章是在2003年发表的，距离现在已经是 10 年了。那时候的研究要求如何和现在的方法相比呢？% j3 E8 p3 H! j6 K9 B
# c0 A4 v( M) R0 I! S, r* R 当然我不代表所有的一级期刊的评委，我只是提出我的观察而已。不过，我觉得我倒有点证据的。你可以看看在最近五年的一级期刊中，看看有多少文章是用同源和 cross-sectional 的方法来收集数据的？这个事实是客观的，总比我们在这里用口来辩为准确吧。# b$ m N7 h& {
3 s% S$ a5 ?" a不过话说回来，管理界对 CMV 的问题的要求，确实比很多其他的社会科学为高。我不知道这是不是好事。我个人对 CMV 的统计处理方法很有保留。最大的问题是现在连同源所产生的问题都不知道，何来谈同源方差的 “假设” 和统计控制呢？。就算现在的 longitudianl measure (就是 X 是 time 1, M 是 time 2, Y 是 time3 的测量) 我觉得都不是一个好的方法。如果一定要同源的话，以我有限的统计知识，我会比较接受用 longitudinal data， 在从其中 partial out rater effect (比如是 latent growth model 等方法)。 |
|
窥视卡
雷达卡
发表于 2012-6-6 23:52:45
转播
淘帖
分享
收藏
支持
反对
@朋友
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
千斤顶
显身卡
对于罗老师的回复学生非常感动，看来科学不断地发展，头脑的方法也得不断与时俱进啊，非常感谢您发的这些文献，我一定会仔细拜读的，希望能从中领悟到当代管理学和心理学研究方法的发展方向。