管理研究中的共同方法變異：問題本質、影響、測試和補救

彭台光; 高月慈; 林鉦棽

doi:10.6504/JOM.2006.23.01.05

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2024/01/01~2024/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2024/10/20~2025/01/20

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

ACI:

数据来源：Academic Citation Index，简称ACI

台湾最大的引用文献资料库，目前收录台湾与港澳地区所出版的人文学、社会学领域学术期刊之书目资料与参考文献，总期刊量超过690种，每年定期公布收录期刊的影响指数(Impact Factor)等指标给大众，并提供专家学者与学术单位实用的计量与分析功能。

五年影响指数（5-Year Impact Factor）：某一期刊前五年所出版的文章在当年度的平均被引用次数。

公式：（前五年发表论文在统计年的被引用次数）÷（前五年论文产出论文总篇数）

例如：A期刊2017年之五年影响指数

(A期刊2012-2016年发表论文在2017年的被引总次数)/(A期刊2012-2016年发表的论文总数)

什么是预刊文章？

为提供读者最前线之学术资讯，于期刊文献获同意刊登后、纸本印制完成前，率先于网路线上发表之文章即为预刊文章。预刊文章尚未有卷期、页次及出版日期资讯，但可藉由DOI号识别。 DOI号是文献的数位身份证字号，不论预刊或正式出版皆不会改变，读者可点击DOI连结，或于DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」连结到文献目前最新版本。

如何引用预刊文章？

请使用预刊文章的线上发表日期及DOI号来引用该篇文献。

引用范例(视不同引文格式规范可能有所差异)：

作者姓名。文章篇名。期刊名称。 YYYY/MM/DD线上预先发表。

doi:DOI 号

来源数据

P77 - 98

社会科学 > 管理学

DOI： 10.6504/JOM

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

管理研究中的共同方法变异：问题本质、影响、测试和补救

Common Method Variance in Management Research: Its Nature, Effects, Detection, and Remedies

彭台光(T. K. Peng) ；高月慈(Y. T. Kao) ；林钲棽(Cheng-Chen Lin)

管理学报； 23 卷 1 期 (2006 / 02 / 01) ， P77 - 98

繁体中文 DOI： 10.6504/JOM.2006.23.01.05

共同方法变异；研究方法；构念效度；同源偏差； common method variance ； research method ； construct validity ； same source bias

1 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (35) │ 被引用文献 (5) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

In the family of management related research, scholars try to understand phenomena in and around organizations, such as employees' perceived justice, patterns of intra-organizational interactions, network relationships of organizations, and consumer responses to brand names. In pursuing these enquiries, they often use self-report instruments to collect data from research subjects. If only one type of survey questionnaire is administered to a single source of respondents and the questionnaire contains both the antecedents and outcome variables, then it is very likely that this research suffers a methodological problem termed common method variance (CMV). CMV will inadequately inflate the relationship between variables, resulting in an increase of statistical significance. Based on such significance, hypothesis is often misjudged as being supported and thus Type I error occurs. Therefore, CMV is regarded as an obvious threat to internal validity. The purpose of this study is to appeal for readers' attention to the CMV problem and to handle it more effectively in future research programs.
To begin with, we articulate what CMV is as well as its causes and impacts. Results from psychometric measurement can be dichotomized as random error variance and systematic variance. This later category in turn consists of two parts: trait variance and method variance (i.e., CMV). Trait variance is the variance reflecting the trait (i.e., construct) measured from a particular sample. Hence, the larger the trait variance is, the higher the construct validity of the particular trait can be. In contrast, both random error variance and method variance are measurement errors. They differ in the fact that method variance, like trait variance, is systematic. Method variance consistently goes along with trait variance and is therefore difficult to detect. Logically, CMV is the part of variance that is totally undesirable and needs to be minimized. Major causes of CMV include the use of same methods (e.g., self-report questionnaire), collecting data from a single source and/or at the same time, respondents' response set, consistency motive, and psychological state (e.g., social desirability, negative affectivity), and other contaminating factors. CMV imposes a negative impact on construct validity, which may lead to misleading statistical significance and eventually inadequate accumulation of management knowledge.
In the second section, we discuss and comment on the statistical and procedural techniques designed to attenuate or to avoid the problem. The statistical techniques are Harman's one-factor test, partial correlation procedure, and multiple method factors, among others. The procedural remedies include scale item trimming, temporal, proximal, psychological, or methodological separation of measurement, and protecting respondent anonymity. The procedural techniques are essentially related to research design, while the statistical ones are post hoc actions taken after data collection. It is obvious that the former is much more effective than the latter.
In the section that follows, we present the results of an extensive review and a comparison we conducted involving a total of 1596 papers in four prestigious Chinese journals issued in Taiwan during 1998-2003 and other four major journals published in English of the same time period. The Chinese periodicals selected are Journal of Management, Management Review, NSYSU Management Review, and NTU Management Review, while those in English are Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Management, and Journal of Organizational Behavior. Our focus was empirical studies that are quantitative in nature. Therefore, non-empirical research and empirical studies that are qualitative were not included. Furthermore, we decided not to examine studies adopting experiment methods because such techniques may be effective in avoiding CMV problems as independent variables are deliberately controlled.
Our investigation yielded interesting findings. Of the 871 studies in English during 1998-2003, there are 60.74% of them without CMV, 35.13% with partial CMV, and only 4.13% plagued with CMV. In contrast, of the 237 Chinese papers reviewed, the percentages of those without, with partial, and with CMV are 7.59%, 8.44%, and 83.97%, respectively. These results suggest that the majority of the Chinese papers did not handle or even recognize the CMV problem appropriately.
In the conclusion, we contend that a sound survey design is much better than 10 fancy statistical remedies and that a careful experimental design should effectively handle the CMV problems. There is room for improvement for our management community to do research without CMV and, eventually, to accumulate our knowledge more accurately.

参考文献 ( 35 ) 〈TOP〉

Hwang, Pin-chyuan(2003).The Impacts of Customer-Contact Employees` Relationships with Their Supervisors and Co-workers on Their Empowerment and Service Work Outcomes: A View of Social Exchange.Management Review,22(4),57-80.
连结：
Avolio, B.,Yammarino, F.J.,Bass, B.M.(1991).Identifying Common Methods Variance with Data Collected from a Single Source: An Unresolved Sticky Issue.Journal of Management,17(3),571-587.
Baltes. B.B.,Bauer, CC.,Bajdo, L.M.,Parker, CR(2002).The Use of Multitrait-Multimethod Data for Detecting Nonlinear Relationships: The Cause of Psychological Climate and Job Satisfaction.Journal of Business and Psychology,17(1),3-17.
Birnbaum, P.H.,Farh, J.L.,Wong, GY.Y.(1986).The Job Characteristics Model in Hong Kong.Journal of Applied Psychology,71,598-605.
Blau, G,(1999).Early-Career Job Factors Influencing the Professional Commitment of Medical Technology.Academy of Management Journal,42,674-686.

被引用文献 ( 5 ) 〈TOP〉

国际计量

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址