This article investigates in two ways the use and reporting of marker variables to detect common method variance (CMV) in organizational research. First, a review of 398 empirical articles and 41 unpublished dissertations that employ marker variables indicates that authors are not reporting adequate information regarding marker variable choice and use, are choosing inappropriate marker variables, and are possibly making errors in their assessment of CMV effects. Second, two data sets are presented that investigate the properties of six prospective markers to assess the degree to which they capture specific, measurable causes of CMV and the conclusions these markers produce when applied to substantive relationships. Results from the review and empirical investigation are used to expand the set of conditions scholars should consider when determining whether to employ a marker technique over other alternatives for detecting and controlling CMV and how best to do so.
Theories of deception have produced upwards of 150 potential verbal and nonverbal communication indicators. Of these, approximately 30 indicators, or cues, have been used previously with automated linguistic analysis tools to study text-based communication. The current research examines the interrelationships among these cues and proposes a set of specific constructs to be validated for high-stakes deception research. We analyzed linguistic-based cues extracted from 367 written statements prepared by suspects and victims of crimes on military bases. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate two models. The superior model retained seven constructs: quantity, specificity, affect, diversity, uncertainty, nonimmediacy, and activation
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.