Abstract
The authors of the original JIBS article share some further reflections on the role of common method variance in international business research.
We thank Bo Bernhard Nielsen for helpful comments on an earlier draft.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Antonakis, J., S. Bendahan, P. Jacquart, and R. Lalive. 2010. On making causal claims: A review and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly 21: 1086–1120.
George, Bert, and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2017. We know the Yin – But where is the Yang? Toward a balanced approach on common source bias in public administration scholarship. Review of Public Personnel Administration 37 (2): 245–279.
Jean, Rueey-Jer Bryan, Ziliang Deng, Daekwan Kim, and Xiaohui Yuan. 2016. Assessing endogeneity issues in international marketing research. International Marketing Review 33 (3): 483–512.
Podsakoff, P.M., S.B. MacKenzie, and J. Lee. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88: 879–903.
Podsakoff, P.M., S.B. MacKenzie, and N.P. Podsakoff. 2012. Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology 63: 539–569.
Schwartz, Andrew, Tracey Rizzuto, Jose Luis Roldan, and Ramon Barrera-Barrera. 2017. Examining the impact and detection of the “Urban Legend” of common method bias. The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems 48 (1): 93–118.
Siemsen, E., A. Roth, and P. Oliveira. 2010. Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational Research Methods 13 (3): 456–476.
Spector, Philip E. 2006. Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods 9 (2): 221–232.
Spector, P.E., C.C. Rosen, H.A. Richardson, L.J. Williams, and R.E. Johnson. 2019. A new perspective on method variance: A measure-centric approach. Journal of Management 45 (3): 855–880.
Tehseen, Shehnaz, T. Ramayah, and Sulaiman Sajilan. 2017. Testing and controlling for common method variance: A review of the available methods. Journal of Management Studies 4 (2): 146–175.
Urbig, D., S. Terjesen, V. Procher, K.S. Muehlfeld, and A. van Witteloostuijn. 2016. Come on and take a free ride: Contributing to public goods in native and foreign language settings. Academy of Management Learning & Education 15: 268–286.
van Witteloostuijn, A., and D. Kolkman. 2018. Is firm growth random? A machine learning perspective. Journal of Business Venturing Insights 11: e00107.
Walker, R.M., G.A. Brewer, M.J. Lee, N. Petrovsky, and A. van Witteloostuijn. 2019. Best practice recommendations for replicating experiments in public administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. https://academic.oup.com/jpart/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jopart/muy047/5074357.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van Witteloostuijn, A., Eden, L., Chang, SJ. (2020). Common Method Variance in International Business Research: Further Reflections. In: Eden, L., Nielsen, B.B., Verbeke, A. (eds) Research Methods in International Business. JIBS Special Collections. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22113-3_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22113-3_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-22112-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-22113-3
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)