Latent Method Factor (Confirmatory)
HR & WorkReliability: method-level3 sample items
About this scale
A confirmatory-factor-analysis approach to common-method bias: model substantive constructs plus a single latent method factor on all items, examining the variance attributable to the method factor.
Sample item(s)
“Specify CFA with substantive factors and a method factor”
“Examine method-factor loadings and explained variance”
“If method variance is large, model adjustments needed”
Reliability
Reported internal consistency: method-level. As a rule of thumb, Cronbach’s α ≥ .70 is considered acceptable, ≥ .80 good, and ≥ .90 excellent for established measures.
Notes
Modern CFA-based CMB control.
Source & citation
Williams, L. J., Hartman, N., & Cavazotte, F. (2010): Method variance and marker variables: A review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 477–514.
Source. Scale details are summarised from the publication cited above. Always consult the original source for the full item set, scoring, and permission to use.
Use it in your research
Need to check the reliability or psychometrics of this scale in your own data? Use the free DrAIStudio research tools:
Cronbach’s alpha calculator
All statistical calculators
Search the full Scale Atlas
Academic writing humanizer