Common Method Bias: It's Bad, It's Complex, It's Widespread, and It's Not Easy to Fix

Podsakoff, Philip M.; Podsakoff, Nathan P.; Williams, Larry J.; Huang, Chengquan; Yang, Junhui

doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-040030

Cited by 148 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 185 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, the fourth validity test was limited by our reliance on self-report measures to assess psychosocial functioning. While these measures are typically viewed favorably in terms of their validity, as evidenced, for example, by their convergence with clinician ratings (Buer Christensen et al, 2020), they are of course not free from biases specific to the self-report method (Podsakoff et al, 2024). To improve the evidence for criterion-oriented validity, future studies should include alternative assessment methods, such as informant reports or behavioral observations of psychosocial functioning.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…VALIDITY OF MEASURES OF MINDREADING ABILITY validity, as evidenced, for example, by their convergence with clinician ratings (Buer Christensen et al, 2020), they are of course not free from biases specific to the self-report method (Podsakoff et al, 2024). To improve the evidence for criterion-oriented validity, future studies should include alternative assessment methods, such as informant reports or behavioral observations of psychosocial functioning.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mindreading measures misread? A multimethod investigation into the validity of self-report and task-based approaches.

Wendt,

Zimmermann,

Spitzer

et al. 2024

Psychological Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mindreading ability-also referred to as cognitive empathy or mentalizing-is typically conceptualized as a relatively stable dimension of individual differences in the ability to make accurate inferences about the mental states of others. This construct is primarily assessed using self-report questionnaires and task-based performance measures. However, the validity of these measures has been questioned: According to rival interpretations, mindreading tasks may capture general cognitive ability, whereas mindreading self-reports may capture perceived rather than actual mindreading ability. In this preregistered multimethod study involving 700 participants from the U.S. general population, we tested the validity of mindreading measures by examining the nomological network of self-reports and task-based methods using structural equation modeling. Specifically, we contrasted the empirical associations with theoretical predictions that assume mindreading measures are valid versus invalid. More consistent with rival interpretations, mindreading tasks showed a negligible latent correlation with mindreading self-reports (.05) and a large one with general cognitive ability (.85), whereas mindreading self-reports were specifically associated with perceived performance in mindreading tasks (.29). Also more consistent with rival interpretations, neither mindreading self-reports nor task-based measures showed positive unique associations with psychosocial functioning when controlling for general cognitive ability and general positive self-evaluation. Instead, negative unique associations emerged for both methods, although this effect was not robust for tasks. Overall, the results cast doubt on the validity of commonly used mindreading measures and support their rival interpretations. Public Significance StatementThis study indicates that psychological tests designed to assess mindreading ability may lack validity in that mindreading tasks may largely capture general cognitive ability rather than specific mindreading ability, while self-report questionnaires on mindreading may primarily capture subjective selfperception.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mindreading measures misread? A multimethod investigation into the validity of self-report and task-based approaches.

Wendt,

Zimmermann,

Spitzer

et al. 2024

Psychological Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Discriminant validity was fulfilled as the intercorrelations between pairs of constructs were less than the square root of the average variance extracted estimates of the two constructs (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; see Table 1). To rule out common method bias in our results, we used procedural and statistical approaches (Podsakoff et al. , 2024).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How and when effective customer journeys drive brand loyalty: the role of consumer-brand identification

Reitsamer,

Stokburger-Sauer,

Kuhnle

2024

JOSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeEffective customer journey design (ECJD) is considered a key variable in customer experience management and an essential source of brand meaning and pro-brand behavior. Although previous research has confirmed its importance for driving brand attitudes and loyalty, the role of consumer-brand identification as a social identity-based influence in this relationship has not yet been discussed. Drawing on construal level and social identity theories, this paper aims to investigate whether effective journeys and the resulting overall journey experience are equally powerful in driving brand loyalty among customers with different levels of consumer-brand identification.Design/methodology/approachThe present article develops and tests a research model using data from the European and US service sectors (N = 1,454) to investigate how and when ECJD affects service brand loyalty.FindingsAcross two cultural contexts, four service industries and 33 service brands, the results reveal that ECJD is a crucial driver of service brand loyalty for customers with low consumer-brand identification. Moreover, the findings show that different aspects of journey effectiveness positively impact the valence of customers’ experience related to those journeys – a process that is ultimately decisive for their brand loyalty.Originality/valueThis study is unique because it generates theoretical and practical knowledge by combining the literature streams of customer journey design, customer experience and branding. Furthermore, this work demonstrates that consumer-brand identification is a critical boundary condition to be considered in the relationship between ECJD and brand loyalty in services.

show abstract

“…Despite the strengths of this study (having two groups of participants in a 5-day diary study), there are some shortcomings to consider. First, the self-reported nature of the data may lead to common method bias (Podsakoff et al, 2023). To avoid this, the multilevel confirmatory factor analysis shows the construct validity.…”

Section: Theoretical Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying the Affective Events Theory to Explore the Effect of Daily Micro-Interruptions on Mental Health: The Mediating Role of Affect and the Moderating Role of Pets at Work

Junça Silva

2024

Span. J. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study relied on the affective events theory and the social exchange theory to develop a framework that explains how situational factors (daily micro-interruptions) enhance affective reactions (negative affect) and, in turn, impair health conditions (mental health) at work. We further delineate theoretical arguments to propose the pet-human’s health effect by demonstrating that pets are boundary conditions that attenuate this relation, and as such are protective conditions for employees’ mental health. We conducted a 5-day diary study with two groups of participants, one with participants who owned pets (N = 82 x 5 = 410), and the other who did not own pets (N = 87 x 5 = 435). The multilevel results showed an indirect effect of daily micro-interruptions on individuals’ mental health through negative affect, with a daily backdrop of poorer mental health for those who did not own a pet (compared to those who owned a pet). These results evidence the benefits of owning a pet for individuals’ mental health, even at work, and as such provide recommendations for teleworking practices. Moreover, this study resorts to an innovative and robust data collection method to demonstrate the pet-human’ health effect. This study expands knowledge on the role of pets in working daily routines and shows that pets may be a personal resource for individuals while working.

show abstract

Common Method Bias: It's Bad, It's Complex, It's Widespread, and It's Not Easy to Fix

Cited by 148 publications

References 185 publications

Mindreading measures misread? A multimethod investigation into the validity of self-report and task-based approaches.

Mindreading measures misread? A multimethod investigation into the validity of self-report and task-based approaches.

How and when effective customer journeys drive brand loyalty: the role of consumer-brand identification

Applying the Affective Events Theory to Explore the Effect of Daily Micro-Interruptions on Mental Health: The Mediating Role of Affect and the Moderating Role of Pets at Work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About