Campus Units

Psychology

Document Type

Article

Publication Version

Accepted Manuscript

Publication Date

11-2018

Journal or Book Title

Journal of Managerial Psychology

Volume

34

Issue

1

First Page

18

Last Page

30

DOI

10.1108/JMP-06-2018-0272

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe common questionable research practices (QRPs) engaged in by management researchers who use confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) as part of their analysis.

Design/methodology/approach The authors describe seven questionable analytic practices and then review one year of journal articles published in three top-tier management journals to estimate the base rate of these practices.

Findings The authors find that CFA analyses are characterized by a high base rate of QRPs with one practice occurring for over 90 percent of all assessed articles.

Research limitations/implications The findings of this paper call into question the validity and trustworthiness of results reported in much of the management literature.

Practical implications The authors provide tentative guidelines of how editors and reviewers might reduce the degree to which the management literature is characterized by these QRPs.

Originality/value This is the first paper to estimate the base rate of six QRPs relating to the widely used analytic tool referred to as CFA in the management literature.

Comments

This accepted article is published as Crede, M., Questionable Research Practices when Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Journal of Managerial Psychology. 2018, 34(1); 18-30. DOI: 10.1108/JMP-06-2018-0272. Posted with permission.

Copyright Owner

Emerald Publishing Limited

Language

en

File Format

application/pdf

Published Version

Share

COinS