IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijkbde/v8y2017i1p68-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Self-reports of organisational citizenship behaviour: a researchers' dilemma

Author

Listed:
  • P. Vijayalakshmi
  • M.V. Supriya

Abstract

Choosing the right source to measure organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB) is a dilemma to researchers. We used narrative review and content analysis to draw meaningful conclusions to resolve this dilemma. Ninety-one very recent articles on OCB were used for the analysis. The primary focus of the narrative review was to examine if there are similarities in research results irrespective of whether self-reports, or other reports were used. The content analysis focused on the remedies used in these studies to handle self-report biases. While researchers expressed the use of self-reports as a limitation of their study, there was not much evidence to prove that self-report bias was strong enough to impact these research results negatively. Self-report measure and other reports are fairly similar. Hence, considering the uniqueness, self-reports are the best source for measuring OCB. Choosing the right measure to elicit data is an important methodological issue that improves the quality of survey research. Our article addresses this key issue.

Suggested Citation

  • P. Vijayalakshmi & M.V. Supriya, 2017. "Self-reports of organisational citizenship behaviour: a researchers' dilemma," International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1), pages 68-88.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijkbde:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:68-88
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=82431
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijkbde:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:68-88. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=354 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.