How (Not) to Solve the Problem: An Evaluation of Scholarly Responses to Common Source Bias

2014/05/24 by N. Favero, Nathan Favero, Justin B. Bullock +1 · 11 citations
Social Sciences · #Electoral Systems and Political Participation #Public Policy and Administration Research #Social and Intergroup Psychology

paper · doi:10.1093/jopart/muu020

openalex publication_date 2014/05/24 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30

Abstract

Public administration scholars are beginning to pay more attention to the problem of common source bias, but little is known about the approaches that applied researchers are adopting as they attempt to confront the issue in their own research. In this essay, we consider the various responses taken by the authors of six articles in this journal. We draw attention to important nuances of the common measurement issue that have previously received little attention and run a set of empirical analyses in order to test the effectiveness of several proposed solutions to the common-source-bias problem. Our results indicate that none of the statistical remedies being used by public administration scholars appear to be reliable methods of countering the problem. Currently, it appears as though the only reliable solution is to find independent sources of data when perceptual survey measures are employed.

Citations

• Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs.
• Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
• Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.
• Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It

Cited by

• Coping During Public Service Delivery: A Conceptualization and Systematic Review of the Literature
• Citizen Satisfaction and the Kaleidoscope of Government Performance: How Multiple Stakeholders See Government Performance
• Individual Performance: From Common Source Bias to Institutionalized Assessment
• Revisiting an “urban legend”: an experimental assessment of common method variance’s impact on relationships in self-reported data
• Promoting Inclusive Workplaces: Conceptualizing and Measuring Inclusive Leadership in Public Organizations
• Cognitive Biases in Street‐Level Resolutions: The Case of Multiple Claims in Tax Disputes
• Time to rediscover task-oriented leadership? A multi-source, time-lagged study on leadership and well-being in public service jobs
• Determined to succeed: Can goal commitment sustain interagency collaboration?
• One problem, two ontologies: How administrative coordination impacts policy coherence
• How Transformational Leadership Supports Intrinsic Motivation and Public Service Motivation: The Mediating Role of Basic Need Satisfaction
• Fostering Public Sector Employees’ Innovative Behavior: The Roles of Servant Leadership, Public Service Motivation, and Learning Goal Orientation

Related

• Organizations and Survey Research
• Individual Performance: From Common Source Bias to Institutionalized Assessment
• Revisiting an “urban legend”: an experimental assessment of common method variance’s impact on relationships in self-reported data
• A replication of “unconscious bias in citizens' evaluations of public sector performance”
• A general condition for bias attenuation by a nondifferentially mismeasured confounder