- 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。3 F0 L* x9 C: h T0 \1 P+ U* C
01. 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), 403-406.5 h- ~- j& i3 v* |6 [
02. 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.# Y* X/ Z8 J, {
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.
) C' J. S) N' y3 O04. 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.) P$ D0 ~6 l' A8 O9 W7 K
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.
0 e9 N( @ L! |+ d, j7 n5 {: l06. 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." Y! X# g$ W9 t% s3 w5 U9 M
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.
2 ~& ?% z; b; h- ?08. Spector, P.E. (2008). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221-232." Y' S$ x: P) C) [1 }% C
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.
$ `- k2 l8 g5 \6 s9 Z9 G* K10. 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), 879-903.8 G2 G* V' r7 o: C+ C [/ a, a9 ]
11.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./ D) L: g5 T \ k5 c' `+ }
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.; B j) U. G8 w( n* y' I& D$ t! {+ ?
13. Bollen, K.A. & Paxton, P. (1998). Detection and determinants of bias in subjective measures. American Sociological Review, 63, 465-478.
; [8 a4 x/ D$ }5 W, k14. Boone, C. & Brabander, B. (1997). Self-reports and CEO locus of control research: A note. Organization Studies, 18(6), 949-971./ p! |1 A. _1 Y- e- a" g
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.& g2 R3 ~9 s$ p
16. 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.* i" o1 z9 C2 R# w/ O5 o8 G
17. 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.
( x, u9 @& N; ]5 k8 o6 b18. 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 o1 d5 O% h0 ~+ E7 H" ^1 ]1 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. g" z, X9 M7 N" |' S. v" P" k
, A1 ]$ z8 X0 b0 v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?) k2 ]! p( e. {
$ E' g, Z9 B$ l: Z: u 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。
4 w8 Q0 H# Q# _# [6 X9 F3 l# A) f3 n; y: R6 j- L2 T X; ^% O
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)。 |
|