重新考虑组织交流研究中的共同方法差异问题

IF 1.9 4区 管理学 Q2 COMMUNICATION Management Communication Quarterly Pub Date : 2024-01-03 DOI:10.1177/08933189231226242
Brian Manata, F. Boster
{"title":"重新考虑组织交流研究中的共同方法差异问题","authors":"Brian Manata, F. Boster","doi":"10.1177/08933189231226242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This manuscript details the different attributes associated with the problem of common-method variance. First, upon defining validity, we review the two primary ways by which scholars attempt to control for common-method variance, and in doing so discuss their merits. Second, we provide two alternative explanations that may also account for the appearance of disparate correlations, neither of which have to do with common-method variance. Finally, we offer a set of parsimonious solutions for the problem of common-method variance, namely CFA without correlated residuals or modeled method factors. Overall, the purpose of this manuscript is to provide guidance for organizational communication scholars when dealing with this problem.","PeriodicalId":47743,"journal":{"name":"Management Communication Quarterly","volume":"119 49","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reconsidering the Problem of Common-Method Variance in Organizational Communication Research\",\"authors\":\"Brian Manata, F. Boster\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08933189231226242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This manuscript details the different attributes associated with the problem of common-method variance. First, upon defining validity, we review the two primary ways by which scholars attempt to control for common-method variance, and in doing so discuss their merits. Second, we provide two alternative explanations that may also account for the appearance of disparate correlations, neither of which have to do with common-method variance. Finally, we offer a set of parsimonious solutions for the problem of common-method variance, namely CFA without correlated residuals or modeled method factors. Overall, the purpose of this manuscript is to provide guidance for organizational communication scholars when dealing with this problem.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47743,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Management Communication Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"119 49\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Management Communication Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189231226242\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management Communication Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189231226242","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本手稿详细介绍了与共同方法方差问题相关的不同属性。首先,在定义有效性后,我们回顾了学者们试图控制共同方法方差的两种主要方法,并讨论了它们的优点。其次,我们提供了两种替代解释,它们也可以解释差异相关性的出现,但都与共同方法方差无关。最后,我们为共同方法方差问题提供了一套简明的解决方案,即没有相关残差或建模方法因子的 CFA。总之,本手稿的目的是为组织传播学者在处理这一问题时提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reconsidering the Problem of Common-Method Variance in Organizational Communication Research
This manuscript details the different attributes associated with the problem of common-method variance. First, upon defining validity, we review the two primary ways by which scholars attempt to control for common-method variance, and in doing so discuss their merits. Second, we provide two alternative explanations that may also account for the appearance of disparate correlations, neither of which have to do with common-method variance. Finally, we offer a set of parsimonious solutions for the problem of common-method variance, namely CFA without correlated residuals or modeled method factors. Overall, the purpose of this manuscript is to provide guidance for organizational communication scholars when dealing with this problem.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
16.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Management Communication Quarterly presents conceptually rigorous, empirically-driven, and practice-relevant research from across the organizational and management communication fields and has strong appeal across all disciplines concerned with organizational studies and the management sciences. Authors are encouraged to submit original theoretical and empirical manuscripts from a wide variety of methodological perspectives covering such areas as management, communication, organizational studies, organizational behavior and HRM, organizational theory and strategy, critical management studies, leadership, information systems, knowledge and innovation, globalization and international management, corporate communication, and cultural and intercultural studies.
期刊最新文献
Technical Anonymity and Employees’ Willingness to Speak Up: Influences of Voice Solicitation, General Timeliness, and Psychological Safety Affective Sensemaking of Relational Precarities: Resilience as Becoming in Pandemic Shifting to Remote Work CSR Communication and the Polarization of Public Discourses: Introduction to the Special Issue From Being to Doing: Exploring the Situated Discourses and Performances of Work Engagement Book Review: Organizational Paradox
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1