SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 1

A Systematic Review of Common Method Bias

Ortak Yöntem Yanlılığı Üzerine Sistematik Bir Yazın Taraması

Beykan ÇİZEL
Onur SELCUK
Eniser ATABAY
Pages
7–18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results of the literatüre review show that there is little awareness among researchers in international tourism journals.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The main aim of this paper is to explain the common method bias (CMB), its importance, possible causes and ways to control it.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Firstly, a total of 1534 articles related with CMB published in SCOPUS were analyzed using bibliometric methods with ile “R” program.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results of the literatüre review show that there is little awareness among researchers in international tourism journals.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The main aim of this paper is to explain the common method bias (CMB), its importance, possible causes and ways to control it. Additionaly, the current situation of CMB in tourism researches has been examined on the basis of the articles. For this purpose, systematic literatüre review was conducted with mixed method. Firstly, a total of 1534 articles related with CMB published in SCOPUS were analyzed using bibliometric methods with ile “R” program. Secondly, the possible causes of CMB and ways of controlling them were examined manually through the main sources determined by bibliometry. Finally, 19 articles published in tourism journals were examined with determined criteria to present the current awareness of CMB. The results of the literatüre review show that there is little awareness among researchers in international tourism journals.

Özet

Bu makalenin temel amacı, ortak yöntem yanlılığının ne olduğunu, önemi, olası nedenlerini ve yanlılığı kontrol etmenin yollarını açıklamak ve turizm araştırmalarındaki mevcut durumun tespitini yapmaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda karma yöntem ile sistematik yazın taraması gerçekleştirilmiştir. İlk olarak Scopus’ta yayımlanan anahtar kelime ve özetlerinde yöntem yanlılığı, ortak yöntem yanlılığı (OYY) ve ortak yöntem varyansı (OYV) kelimeleri geçen toplam 1534 çalışma, “R” programı ile bibliyometrik yöntemler kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. İkinci aşamada manuel olarak, saptanan temel kaynaklar üzerinden yöntem yanlılığının olası nedenleri ve kontrol etme yolları incelenmiştir. Son olarak ise OYY’nin olası nedenleri ve kontrol etme yöntemleri ile ilgili ölçüt seti oluşturulmuş ve 1534 çalışmanın içerisinde turizm dergilerinde yayımlanan 19 çalışma değerlendirilmiştir. Yazın taraması sonuçları uluslararası turizm dergilerinde araştırmacılar arasında OYY konusunda az da olsa bir farkındalık oluştuğunu göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇİZEL, B., SELCUK, O., ATABAY, E. (2020). A Systematic Review of Common Method Bias. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 1, 7–18. https://ajindex.com/articles/141443

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Aria, M. ve Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis, Journal of Informetrics, 11 (4): 959-975.
  2. Aulakh, P. S. ve Gencturk, E. F. (2000). International Principal–Agent Relationships: Control, Governance and Performance, Industrial Marketing Management, 29 (6): 521-538.
  3. Bagozzi, R. P. ve Yi, Y. (1990). Multi Trait–Multi Method Matrices in Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (4): 426-439.
  4. Campbell, D. T. ve Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multi Trait-Multi Method Matrix, Psychological Bulletin, 56 (2): 81–105.
  5. Carlson, D. S. ve Kacmar, K. M. (2000). Work–Family Conflict in the Organization: Do Life Role Values Make a Difference?, Journal of Management, 26 (5): 1031-1054.
  6. Cheng, J. C. ve Chen, C. Y. (2017).
  7. Job Resourcefulness, Work Engagement and Prosocial Service Behaviors in the Hospitality Industry, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29 (10): 2668-2687.
  8. Cheraghalizadeh, R. ve Tümer, M. (2017). The Effect of Applied Resources on Competitive Advantage in Hotels: Mediation and Moderation Analysis, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 31: 265-272.
  9. Conway, J. M. ve Lance, C. E. (2010). What Reviewers Should Expect from Authors Regarding Common Method Bias in Organizational Research, Journal of Business and Psychology, 25 (3): 325-334.
  10. Cronbach, L. J. (1946).
  11. Responsesets and Test Validity, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6 (4): 475-494.
  12. Feldman, J.M. ve Lynch, J.G. (1988). Self-Generated Validity and Other Effects of Measurement on Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior, Journal of Applied Psychology, 73 (3): 421-35.
  13. Ferreira, A. I., Martinez, L. F., Lamelas, J. P. ve Rodrigues, R. I. (2017). Mediation of Job Embeddedness and Satisfaction in the Relationship between Task Characteristics and Turnover: A Multi Level Study in Portuguese Hotels, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29 (1): 248-267.
  14. Ferreira, F. A. (2018). Mapping the Field of Arts-Based Management: Bibliographic Coupling and Co-Citation Analyses, Journal of Business Research, 85: 348-357.
  15. Ferrer-Rosell, B., Coenders, G. ve Marine-Roig, E. (2017). Is Planning Through the Internet (Un)Related to Trip Satisfaction?, Information Technology & Tourism, 17 (2): 229-244.
  16. Gould, J., Moore, D., Karlin, N. J., Gaede, D. B., Walker, J. ve Dotterweich, A. R. (2011). Measuring Serious Leisure in Chess: Model Confirmation and Method Bias,