Examining the "urban legend" of common method bias: Nine common errors and their impact

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages

  Schwarz, Andrew ^a   Schwarz, Colleen ^a   Rizzuto, Tracey ^a  

^a LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES; STRUCTURAL MODEL; SYSTEM SCIENCES;

INSTRUMENT ERRORS;

EID: 51449121662     PISSN: 15301605     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/HICSS.2008.155     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Agarwal. R and I. Prasad. "A Conceptual and Optional Definition of Personal lnnovativeness in the Domain of lnformation Technology," Information Systems Research, 9:2, 1998, pp. 204-215.
2. Campbell, D, T. and Fiske, D.. "Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multi-method matrix." Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 1959, pp. 81-105.
3. Chin, W. W. The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 1998, pp. 295-336.
4. Clements, K. and Turpin, G. "The Life Events Scale For Students: Validation For Use With British Samples." Personality and Individual Differences, 20(6), 1996, pp. 747-751.
5. Compeau, D.R., and Higgins, C.A. "Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test." MIS Quarterly, 19 (2), June 1995, pp. 189-211.
6. Crampton, S. M. and Wagner, J. A. "Percept-percept inflation in microorganizational research: An investigation of prevalence and effect." Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1), 1994, pp. 67-76.
7. Feldman, J. M. and Lynch, J. G. "Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior." Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 1998, pp. 421-135.
8. Hufnagel, E. M. and Conca, C. "User response data: The potential for errors and biases." Information Systems Research, 5(1), 1994, pp. 48-73.
9. Jackson, D.N Acquiescence response styles: Problems of identification and control. In I.A. Barg (Ed.), Response set in personality assessment. Chicago, IL: Aldine, 1967.
10. Kemery, E. R. and Dunlap, W. P. "Partialling factor scores does not control method variance: A reply to Podsakoff and Todor." Journal of Management, 12(4), 1982, pp. 525-544.
11. Lewis, W., Agarwal, R., and Sambamurthy, V. "Sources of Influence on Beliefs about Information Technology Use: An Empirical Study of Knowledge Workers." MIS Quarterly, 27(4), December, 2003, pp. 657-678.
12. Lindell, M. K. and Whitney, D. J. "Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs." Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 2001, pp. 114-121.
13. Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., and Patil, A. "Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research." Management Science, 52(12), December 2006, pp. 1865-1883.
14. Moore, G. C. and Benbasat, I. "Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation." Information Systems Research, 2(3), 1991, pp 173-191.
15. Podsakoff, P M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.Y., and Podsakoff., N. P. "Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies." Journal of Applied Psychology. 88(5), 2003, pp. 879-903.
16. Rorer, L.G. The great response-style myth. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 1965, pp. 129-156.
17. Spector, P. E. "Method Variance in Organizational Research: Truth or Urban Legend?" Organizational Research Methods, 9, 2006, pp. 221-232.
18. Straub, D, Boudreau, M. C., and Gefen, D."Validation guidelines for IS positivist research." Communications of the Association of Information Systems, 13, 2004, pp. 380-427.
19. Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. "Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 54(6), June 1988, pp. 1063-70.