Assessing common method bias: Problems with the ulmc technique

MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 1003-1019

  Chin, Wynne W ^a,b   Thatcher, Jason Bennett ^c   Wright, Ryan T ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON   (United States)

^b Sogang University   (South Korea)

^c CLEMSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Common method bias; Partial least squares; Structural equation modeling; Unmeasured latent method construct

Indexed keywords

INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS; MONTE CARLO METHODS;

COMMON METHOD BIAS; PARTIAL LEAST SQUARE (PLS); STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; UNMEASURED LATENT METHOD CONSTRUCTS;

LEAST SQUARES APPROXIMATIONS;

EID: 84864919547     PISSN: 02767783     EISSN: 21629730     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/41703491     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Bagozzi, R. P. 2011. "Measurement and Meaning in Information Systems and Organizational Research: Methodoloigcal and Philosophical Foundations," MIS Quarterly (35:2), pp. 261-292.
2. Bollen, K. A. 1989. Structural Equations with Latent Variables, New York: Wiley.
3. Burton-Jones, A. 2009. "Minimizing Method Bias Through Programmatic Research," MIS Quarterly (33:3), pp. 445-471.
4. Chin, W. W. 1998a. "Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling.," MIS Quarterly (22:1), p. vii.
5. Chin, W. W. 1998b. "The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling," in Modern Methods for Business Research, G. A. Marcoulides (ed.), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 295-336.
6. Chin, W. W. 2010. "How to Write Up and Report PLS Analyses," in Handbook of Partial Least Squares Concepts, Methods and Applications, V. E. Vinzi, W. W. Chin, J. Henseler, and H. Wang (eds.), Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 650-690.
7. Chin, W. W., and Gopal, A. 1995. "Adoption Intention in GSS: Relative Importance of Beliefs," Data Base (26:2/3), pp. 42-64.
8. Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., and Newsted, P. R. 2003. "A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and an Electronic-Mail Emotion/Adoption Study," Information Systems Research (14:2), pp. 189-217.
9. Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (1st ed.), New York: Academic Press.
10. Cote, J. A., and Buckley, M. R. 1987. "Estimating Trait, Method, and Error Variance: Generalizing Across 70 Construct Validation Studies," Journal of Marketing Research (25), pp. 315-318.
11. Davis, F. D. 1989. "Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology," MIS Quarterly (13:3), pp. 319-340.
12. Doty, D. H., and Glick, W. H. 1998. "Common Method Bias: Does Common Method Variance Really Bias Results?," Organizational Research Methods (1:4), pp. 374-406. (Pubitemid 128543457)
13. Goodhue, D., Lewis, W., and Thompson, R. L. 2007. "Statistical Power in Analyzing Interaction Effects: Questioning the Advantage of PLS with Product Indicators," Information Systems Research (18:2), pp. 211-227.
14. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., and Tatham, R. L. 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15. Jöreskog, K. G., and Sorbom, D. 1993. PRELIS 2 User's Reference Guide, Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International. Kline, T. 2005. Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation (1st ed.), London: Sage Publications.
16. Liang, H., Saraf, N., Hu, Q., and Xue, Y. 2007. "Assimilation of Enterprise Systems: The Effect of Institutional Pressures and the Mediating Role of Top Management," MIS Quarterly (31:1), pp. 59-87. (Pubitemid 46382518)
17. Lindell, M., and Whitney, D. 2001. "Accounting for Common Method Variance in Cross-Sectional Research Designs," Journal of Applied Psychology (86:1), pp. 114-121. (Pubitemid 33404733)
18. Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., and Widaman, K. F. 2002. "To Parcel or Not to Parcel: Exploring the Question, Weighing the Merits," Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal of Applied Psychology (9:2), pp. 151-173.
19. Lohmöller, J.-B. 1989. Latent Variable Path Modeling with Partial Least Squares, Heidelberg, Germany: Physica-Verlag.
20. Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., and Patil, A. 2006. "Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research," Management Science (52:12), pp. 1865-1883. (Pubitemid 44927001)
21. Mattson, S. 1997. "How to Generate Non-Normal Data for Simulation of Structural Equation Models," Multivariate Behavioral Research (32), pp. 355-373. (Pubitemid 127341624)
22. Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N., Skattebo, A. L., and Kinney, T. B. 2004. "Raters Who Pursue Different Goals Give Different Ratings," Journal of Applied Psychology (89:1), pp. 158-164. (Pubitemid 38213821)
23. Pace V. L. 2010. Method Variances From the Perspectives of Reviewers: Poorly Understood Problem or Overemphasized Complaint?," Organizational Research Methods (13:3), pp. 421-434.
24. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., and Podsakoff, N. P. 2003. "Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies," Journal of Applied Psychology (88), pp. 879-903. (Pubitemid 37239703)
25. Reinartz, W. J., Echambadi, R., and Chin, W. W. 2002. "Generating Non-Normal Data for Simulation of Structural Equation Models Using Mattson's Method," Multivariate Behavioral Research (37:2), pp. 227-244. (Pubitemid 36630365)
26. Richardson, H. A., Simmering, M. J., and Sturman, M. C. 2009. "A Tale of Three Prespectives: Examining Post Hoc Statisical Techniques for Detection and Correction of Common Method Variance," Organizational Research Methods (12:4), pp. 762-800.
27. Sharma, R., Yetton, P., and 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), pp. 491-512.
28. Siemsen, E., Roth, A., and Oliveira, P. 2010. "Common Method Bias in Regression Models with Linear, Quadratic, and Interaction Effects," Organizational Research Methods (13:3), pp. 456-476.
29. Spector, P. E. 2006. "Method Variance in Organizational Research: Truth or Urban Legend? ," Organizational Research Methods (9), pp. 221-232. (Pubitemid 43907721)
30. Vance, A., Elie-Dit-Cosaque, C., and Straub, D. W. 2008. "Examining Trust in Information Technology Artifacts: The Effects of System Quality and Culture," Journal of Management Information Systems (24:4), pp. 73-100. (Pubitemid 351721658)
31. Williams, L. J., and Brown, B. K. 1994. "Method Variance in Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Research: Effects on Correlations, Path Coefficients, and Hypothesis Testing," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (57), pp. 185-209.
32. Williams, L. J., Cote, J. A., and Buckley, M. R. 1989. "Lack of Method Variance in Self-Reported and Perceptions at Work: Reality or Artifact?," Journal of Applied Psychology (74), pp. 323-331.
33. Williams, L. J., Edwards, J. R., and Vandenberg, R. J. 2003. "Recent Advances in Causal Modeling Methods for Organizational and Management Research," Journal of Management (29:6), pp. 903-936. (Pubitemid 37453272)
34. Williams, L. J., Hartman, N., and Cavazotte, F. 2010. "Method Variance and Marker Variables: A Review and Comprehensive CFA Marker Technique," Organizational Research Methods (13), pp. 477-514.
35. Wold, H. 1985. "Partial Least Squares," in Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences, S. Kotz and N. L. Johnson (eds.), New York: Wiley, pp. 581-591.