Dear Sumedha,

A very useful resource (and resource person) I came across was Dr. James Gaskin. http://statwiki.kolobkreations.com/wiki/Main_Page

One of the ways to identify whether you should use a CMB test is if you've actually collected data on some variable that can inform you about bias in responding to your scale. For instance, if you have employed a social desirability scale, then doing a CMB would be recommended. However, if you have not, then reporting Harmann's single factor test should suffice I presume. Hope this helps :)

Hi Sumedha,

This is in deed a very insightful paper which makes it clear why and how CMB needs to be addressed. As the literature review reveals, the issue is relevant for well over 80% of the reviewed papers, but in deed only few authors corrected for the bias.

After the paper had been published, I noticed that several authors were implementing the recommendations made in the paper, e.g.:

De Vries, E. (2012). Personality predictors of leadership styles and the self–other

agreement problem. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 809-821

Raes, A., Bruch, H., de Jong, S. (2012):  How top management team behavioural integration can impact employee work outcomes: Theory development and first empirical tests. Human Reations, 67 (8)

So all in all, CMB should be addressed.

Thanks Michael Frone, David Uhlenbrock and Mario Grinwis for answering my query.

Johnson et al (2011) provide five different methods for testing CMB. You would find one suitable for you: 

Johnson, Russell E., Christopher Rosen, Emilija Djurdjevic (2011), Assessing the Impact of Common Method Variance on Higher Order Multidimensional Constructs, Journal of Applied Psychology, 96( 4), 744–761.

Dear Sumedha,

A very useful resource (and resource person) I came across was Dr. James Gaskin. http://statwiki.kolobkreations.com/wiki/Main_Page

One of the ways to identify whether you should use a CMB test is if you've actually collected data on some variable that can inform you about bias in responding to your scale. For instance, if you have employed a social desirability scale, then doing a CMB would be recommended. However, if you have not, then reporting Harmann's single factor test should suffice I presume. Hope this helps :)

Larry Williams has done a lot of work on SEM methods both when you have specific measures of potential biases:

         Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1994). An alternative approach to method effects by using latent-variable models: Applications in organizational behavior research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3), 323-331. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.323

and when you don't, i.e., the CFA marker technique:

               Williams, 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. doi: 10.1177/1094428110366036

These references, passed to me earlier by a colleague on RG,  were quite helpful and insighful

Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2010). On making causal claims: A review and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 1086-1120.

Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business Psychology, DOI 10.1007/s10869-010-9181-6.

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.

To address and assess common method variance is indeed an important issue. However, the impact of common method bias on the results is not clear and seems to be overstated in research. A number of authors have remarked that research tended to exaggerate the problem of common method variance.

These references might interest you:

Schaller, T. K., Patil, A., & Malhotra, N. K. 2015. Alternative techniques for assessing common method variance: An analysis of the theory of planned behavior research. Organizational Research Methods, 18(2): 177-206.

Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2): 221-232.

 Dear

This website is very helpful :

http://statwiki.kolobkreations.com

Sumedha,

Larry Williams published an updated piece this year (2015) on the CB-SEM based CFA marker variable technique for CMB detection,  assessment of the strength of the effect and, where necessary,  correction

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274262633_Ideal_Nonideal_and_No-Marker_Variables_The_Confirmatory_Factor_Analysis_%28CFA%29_Marker_Technique_Works_When_It_Matters

Article Ideal, Nonideal, and No-Marker Variables: The Confirmatory F...

I find only a very few research papers employing the CMB test. It makes me think whether should I write about the CMB test in my research paper or not. What's your views regarding this test?

Generally finding more and more "blind" reviewers / thesis examiners now are asking for the CMB test result - suggesting you perform the test so that you can answer / include in your paper when being asked by the reviewers.  There are few methods to test the CMB, in case you need can refer to my answer in the following RG link:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_anyone_know_what_is_the_purpose_of_common_method_bias_in_structural_equation_modeling

My colleagues 

I performed the single common method factor approach to diagnose a bias for my data. This test reveals that the fit indices of the model with latent common factor are very similar to those in my hypothesized measurement model. In addition, the Chi-square difference between the two models is not significant, what these findings mean?  

Hi Amer,

Podsakoff et al 2003 did a great analysis on the single latent factor approach. Attached paper reviews the pros and cons of single factor methods for detecting, measuring and treating with common method bias.

Richardsons 2008 paper also makes a slight reference on page 49

Silburn

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/9075176_Common_Method_Biases_in_Behavioral_Research_A_Critical_Review_of_the_Literature?ev=prf_pub

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234021853_A_Tale_of_Three_Perspectives

Article A Tale of Three Perspectives

Article Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Revi...

Thank you Clarke

Thank you. These articles and suggestions are helpful. I am having some problems testing CMB using CLF, CLF unconstrained , CLF constrained with and without bootstrapping. (getting some weird output when re-running MLE- I a not getting consistent results with many large negative estimates that make no sense and should not be occurring). However, after transforming my data using Templeton's approach the results look as they should.