IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-05721211.html

Methodological threat or myth?

Author

Listed:
  • Nikos Bozionelos

    (EM - EMLyon Business School)

  • Marcia J. Simmering

    (Louisiana Tech University)

Abstract

New key evidence on common method variance (CMV) has been generated in the last decade (including quantitative and qualitative reviews, and simulations) to estimate its real validity threat, and evaluate the post hoc techniques to detect and correct for its effects. This work looks at the new evidence, and reviews all HRM-related empirical articles published in the last 10 years in six major journals. The following primary conclusions are drawn. First, adoption of new knowledge about CMV by the empirical literature has been uneven. Second, published research in these journals indicates few incidences of meaningful distortion of estimates due to CMV, even when post hoc tests are used to detect it. Third, these findings in the empirical literature mirror the conclusions of reviews and simulations of the last 10 years, which indicate that the probability of significant distortion of estimates because of CMV is very limited.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikos Bozionelos & Marcia J. Simmering, 2022. "Methodological threat or myth?," Post-Print hal-05721211, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05721211
    DOI: 10.1111/1748-8583.12398
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-05721211v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-05721211v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1748-8583.12398?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-05721211. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.