Controlling Common Method Variance while Measuring the Impact of Emotional Intelligence on Well-being

Abstract

Emotional intelligence (EI) is the ability of an individual to use emotions intelligently for positive outcomes. This ability is said to have an impact on many aspects of our personal and professional lives. Well-being (WB) is a person�s state of mind regarding his/her life. Theory suggests that highly emotionally intelligent individuals are likely to experience psychological well-being at a higher level than individuals who are low in emotional intelligence. Based on this concept, this paper examines the empirical relation between EI and WB, both of which are attitudinal variables. A sample of 104 respondents from the manufacturing sector of South India was considered for the study and their emotional intelligence and well-being levels were assessed using appropriate tools. When two attitude-based constructs are obtained from the same respondent, using the same instrument, at the same time, then the relationship between them is said to be influenced by Common Method Variance (CMV). It is the variance that is attributable to the measurement method rather than to the constructs the measures represent and is said to introduce a spurious correlation between the variables of interest. In this study, both EI and WB were obtained from the same respondent, through a single instrument. Hence CMV was considered and acted upon. While controlling the effect of CMV on the empirical relation between EI and WB, this paper aims at the following sub-objectives: To assess the EI and WB levels of the respondents To implement procedural remedies to control CMV To implement statistical remedies to control CMV To prove that EI is a predictor of WB, over and above the effect of CMV. Procedural remedies were used with respect to questionnaire design and statistical remedies were used to partial out the effect of CMV. This paper should serve as a framework for researchers, who wish to evaluate the potential biasing effects of method variance in their research, pertaining to behavioural aspects.

The mediating role of emotional intelligence and marital adjustment in the relationship between mindfulness in marriage and subjective well-being

“…Emotional intelligence contributes to subjective well-being (Griebel, 2015). Individuals feel the positive effects of being able to use their emotions in their private life and working life (Krishnaveni & Deepa, 2013), and ability to manage emotions increases subjective well-being (Terzioğlu, 2016). Emotional intelligence helps individuals acquire the ability to establish quality interpersonal relationships ( Bar-On, 2006).…”

Psychological Detachment Mediating the Daily Relationship between Workload and Marital Satisfaction

“…However, we eliminated between-person variance and variance caused by individual response tendencies by person-mean centering the variables (Ilies et al, 2010) and since common method variance cannot explain nor alter interaction effects (i.e., significant cross-level interaction with work-home segmentation preference; Siemsen et al, 2010), we assume these biases only scarcely influenced our results. Moreover, to check for common method variance, we performed a Harman's single-factor test (Podsakoff et al, 2003; Krishnaveni and Deepa, 2013). This test examines whether the data provides a good fit with a one-factor model, which would suggest one underlying latent factor due to common method variance.…”

Lucid Dreaming, Nightmares, and Sleep Paralysis: Associations With Reality Testing Deficits and Paranormal Experience/Belief

“…Such cross-sectional designs are frequently criticized because they can result in common method variance (Spector, 2019). To prevent common method variance, the researchers employed procedural remedies (Krishnaveni and Deepa, 2013). Firstly, the study brief and scale instructions emphasized that each measure assessed a different construct.…”