Common method variance (CMV), a systematic measurement error, is a key source of contamination in survey research. This article examines a potential source of CMV—socially desirable responding (SDR)—in the context of Indian culture. The statistical remedies of method variance have been critically evaluated for their suitability to capture SDR. The statistical remedy of ‘controlling for the effect of a directly measured latent method factor’ using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) has been profoundly explained. The procedural guidelines on executing CFA using AMOS have been delineated to facilitate substantive research vulnerable to method variance.
BagozziR.P. (1984). A prospectus for theory construction in marketing.The Journal of Marketing,48(1) 11–29.
4.
BagozziR.P.YiY. (1991). Assessing method variance in multitrait–multimethod matrices: The case of self-reported affect and perceptions at work.Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(5), 547–560.
BaumgartnerH.WeijtersB. (2012). Commentary on ‘common method bias in marketing: Causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies’.Journal of Retailing, 88(4), 563–566.
7.
BeckerT.E.CoteJ.A. (1994). Additive and multiplicative method effects in applied psychological research: An empirical assessment of three models.Journal of Management,20(3), 625–641.
8.
BernardiR.A. (2006). Associations between Hofstede’s cultural constructs and social desirability response bias. Journal of Business Ethics, 65(1) 43–53.
9.
BowlingA. (2005). Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effect on data quality. Journal of Public Health, 27(3) 281–291.
10.
CampbellD.T.FiskeD.W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait–multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2) 81–105.
11.
ChangS.J.Van WitteloostuijnA.EdenL. (2010). From the editors: Common method variance in international business research.Journal of International Business Studies, 41(2), 178–184.
12.
CheungJ.MonroeG.S. (2003). Exploring social desirability bias. Journal of Business Ethics,44(4) 291–302.
13.
CohenJ.R.PantL.W.SharpD.J. (1995). An exploratory examination of international differences in auditors’ ethical perceptions. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 7(1), 37–64.
14.
CoteJ.A.BuckleyR. (1987). Estimating trait, method and error variance: Generalizing across 70 construct validation studies.Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 315–318.
15.
CoteJ.A.BuckleyR. (1988). Measurement error and theory testing in consumer research: An illustration of the importance of construct validation.Journal of Consumer Research, 14(March), 579–582.
16.
CrowneD.MarloweD. (1964). The approval motive: Studies in evaluative dependence. New York:Wiley.
17.
DaltonD.OrtegrenM. (2011). Gender differences in ethical research: The importance of controlling for the social desirability response bias.Journal of Business Ethics, 103(1), 73–93.
18.
De JongM.G.PietersR.FoxJ.P. (2010). Reducing social desirability bias through item randomized response: An application to measure underreported desires.Journal of Marketing Research, 47(February), 14–27.
19.
ChurchillG.A.Jr (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(February), 64–73.
20.
DiamantopoulosA.WinklhoferH.M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development.Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 269–277.
21.
DuffyB.SmithK.TerhanianG.BremerJ. (2005). Comparing data from online and face-to-face surveys. International Journal of Marketing Research, 47(6) 615–639.
22.
FabrigarL.R.PorterR.D.NorrisM.E. (2010). Some things you should know about structural equation modeling but never thought to ask. Journal of Consumer Psychology,20(2)221–
225.
23.
FisherR.J. (1993). Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(2) 303–315.
24.
FisherR.J. (2000). The future of social-desirability bias research in Marketing. Psychology & Marketing,17(2), 73–77.
25.
FornellC.LarckerD.F. (1981a). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(February), 39–50.
26.
FornellC.LarckerD.F. (1981b). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics.Journal of Marketing Research, 18(August), 382–388.
27.
FullerC.M.SimmeringM.J.AtincG.AtincY.BabinB.J. (2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8) 3192–3198.
28.
FiskeD.W. (1982). Convergent–discriminant validation in measurements and research strategies. In BrinbirgD.KidderL.H. (Eds), Forms of validity in research (pp.77–99). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
GansterD.C.HennesseyH.W.LuthansF. (1983). Social desirability response effects: Three alternative models.Academy of Management Journal, 26(2), 321–331.
30.
GeigerM.A.O’ConnellB.T. (2000). An examination of using surrogate measures to assess social desirability response bias. Research in Accounting Ethics, 6(1) 107–120.
31.
GerbingD.W.AndersonJ.C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research,25(May), 186–192.
32.
GorrellG.FordN.MaddenA.HoldridgeP.EaglestoneB. (2011). Countering method bias in questionnaire-based user studies. Journal of Documentation, 67(3) 507–524.
33.
HairJ.F.JrBlackW.C.BabinB.J.AndersonR.E.TathamR.L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. New Delhi: Pearson Education.
34.
HofstedeG.H.HofstedeG. (2001).Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations.New Delhi:SAGE Publications.
35.
HolbrookA.L.GreenM.C.KrosnickJ.A. (2003). Telephone versus face-to-face interviewing of national probability samples with long questionnaires: Comparisons of respondent satisficing and social desirability response bias.Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(1), 79–125.
36.
IacobucciD. (2009). Everything you always wanted to know about SEM (structural equations modeling) but were afraid to ask. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(4) 673–680.
37.
JoM.S.NelsonJ.E.KieckerP. (1997). Model for controlling social desirability bias by direct and indirect questioning, Marketing Letters, 8(4) 429–437.
38.
JoreskogK.G.SorbomD. (1976). LISREL III: Estimation of linear structural equation systems by maximum likelihood methods.Chicago:National Educational Resources, Inc.
39.
KeillorB.OwensD.PettijohnC. (2001). A cross-cultural/cross-national study of influencing factors and socially desirable response biases. International Journal of Market Research, 43(1) 63–84.
40.
KingM.F.BrunerG.C. (2000). Social desirability bias: A neglected aspect of validity testing. Psychology & Marketing17(2), 79–103.
41.
KreuterF.PresserS.TourangeauR. (2008). Social desirability bias in CATI, IVR, and web surveys: The effects of mode and question sensitivity.Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 847–865.
42.
KrishnaveniR.DeepaR. (2013). Controlling common method variance while measuring the impact of emotional intelligence on well-being. Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, 38(1), 41–48.
43.
KumarA.DillonW.R. (1992). An integrative look at the use of additive and multiplicative covariance structure models in the analysis of MTMM data. Journal of Marketing Research,29(1), 51–64.
44.
LalwaniA.K.ShavittS.JohnsonT. (2006). What is the relation between cultural orientation and socially desirable responding?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(1), 165–178.
45.
LeeZ.SargeantA. (2011). Dealing with social desirability bias: An application to charitable giving.European Journal of Marketing, 45(5), 703–719.
46.
LindellM.K.WhitneyD.J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114–121.
47.
LuskJ.L.NorwoodF.B. (2010). Direct versus indirect questioning: An application to the well-being of farm animals.Social Indicators Research, 96(3), 551–565.
48.
MacKenzieS.B. (2001). Opportunities for improving consumer research through latent variable structural equation modeling. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 159–166.
49.
MacKenzieS.B.PodsakoffP.M. (2012). Common method bias in marketing: Causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies.Journal of Retailing, 88(4), 542–555.
50.
MiddletonK.L.JonesJ.L. (2000). Socially desirable response sets: The impact of country culture. Psychology & Marketing, 17(2), 149–163.
51.
MinH.ParkJ.KimH.J. (2016). Common method bias in hospitality research: A critical review of literature and an empirical study.International Journal of Hospitality Management, 56, 126–135.
52.
NancarrowC.BraceI.WrightL.T. (2001). ‘Tell me lies, tell me sweet lies’: Dealing with socially desirable responses in market research.The Marketing Review,2(1), 55–69.
53.
NunnallyJ.C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
54.
PaulhusD.L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(3), 598–609.
55.
PeterJ.P. (1979). Reliability: A review of psychometric basics and recent marketing practices.Journal of marketing research, 16(1), 6–17.
56.
PeterJ.P. (1981). Construct validity: A review of basic issues and marketing practices.Journal of Marketing Research, 18(May), 133–145.
57.
PodsakoffP.M.MacKenzieS.B.LeeJ. Y.PodsakoffN.P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
58.
RichmanW.L.KieslerS.WeisbandS.DrasgowF. (1999). A meta-analytic study of social desirability distortion in computer-administered questionnaires, traditional questionnaires, and interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(5), 754–775.
59.
RiemerH.ShavittS. (2011). Impression management in survey responding: Easier for collectivists or individualists?Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(2), 157–168.
60.
RossiterJ.R. (2002). The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19(4), 305–335.
61.
RoxasB.LindsayV. (2012). Social desirability bias in survey research on sustainable development in small firms: An exploratory analysis of survey mode effect. Business Strategy and the Environment,21(4), 223–235.
62.
SchreiberJ.B.NoraA.StageF.K.BarlowE.A.KingJ. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323–337.
63.
SteenkampJ.B.E.M.De JongM.BaumgartnerH. (2010). Socially desirable response tendencies in survey research. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(April), 199–214.
64.
TellisG.J.ChandrasekaranD. (2010). Extent and impact of response biases in cross-national survey research. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(4), 329–341.
65.
TourangeauR.RipsL.R.RasinskiK. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
66.
WidmarN.J.O.ByrdE.S.DominickE.S.WolfC.A.AcharyaL. (2016). Social desirability bias in reporting of holiday season healthfulness. Preventive Medicine Reports, 4, 270–276.
67.
WilliamsL.J.AndersonS.E. (1994). An alternative approach to method effects by using latent-variable models: Applications in organizational behavior research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3), 323–331.
68.
WilliamsL.J.HartmanN.CavazotteF. (2010). Method variance and marker variables: A review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 477–514.
69.
ZerbeW.J.PaulhusD.L. (1987). Socially desirable responding in organizational behavior: A reconception. Academy of Management Journal, 12(2), 250–264.
