The impact of the academy of marketing science on marketing scholarship: An analysis of the research published inJAMS

This article presents an analysis of the research published in theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS). A brief history of the journal is chronicled, and its output in recent years is considered. Special attention is paid to the content of the articles published and the research methods used. An analysis of frequent contributors is also conducted. Much of the analysis focuses on the past 10 years. The conclusion is thatJAMS has made a significant impact on marketing scholarship and has emerged as a top marketing journal of which all the fellows of the academy can justifiably be proud. In an article by Wheatley and Wilson (1987), he was ranked number one in the country based on articles published in theJournal of Marketing Research during 1980–1985. He holds the all-time record for the maximum number of publications in theJournal of Health Care Marketing. He is ranked number one based on publications inJAMS since its inception through Volume 23 (1995). He is also number one based on publications inJAMS during the 10-year period of 1986–1995. He has published 67 articles in major refereed journals. The second edition of his book titledMarketing Research: An Applied Orientation was published recently (Prentice Hall, 1996). The book has received widespread adoption at both the graduate and undergraduate levels, with more than 100 schools using it. He is the winner of numerous awards and honors for research, teaching, and service to the profession. An erratum to this article is available at .     

Research traditions and patterns in marketing scholarship

Summary In the past 40 years, marketing scholarship has made tremendous advances. Our methods are diverse and relatively sophisticated. As a brief perusal of any marketing textbook (or journal) indicates, we have developed approaches for solving important managerial problems. Consumer behavior, sales management, and advertising have been distinct fields of study, within marketing, for more than 40 years. There are specialized journals for each of these areas, butJAMS, as a general journal, also publishes scholarly articles in these areas. Nonetheless, each of these subdisciplines has its own unique set of patterns and traditions, and there does not appear to be a lot of communication between scholars who specialize in distinct subareas. In this way, we have a tendency to remain somewhat isolated as researchers and scholars. At the same time, there is an increasing challenge to fit all of marketing scholarship under one unified and harmonious tent.     

Expanding our understanding of marketing in society

The Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science was started 40 years ago, at a time when “marketing in society” issues were capturing much attention from marketing scholars. Since that time both the field and this journal have grown and matured, but the marketing in society area has become somewhat removed from the dominant perspectives of marketing scholarship. This paper provides an historical perspective on these developments and offers an examination of the fundamental role of societal interests in our field. Six basic topics are explored: (1) the hundred years of history of marketing thought development, as reflected in the “4 Eras” of marketing thought; (2) the ebbs and flows of attention to marketing in society topics during these 4 Eras; (3) two illustrations of difficulties brought about by this area’s move to sideline status in the field; (4) our concept of the “aggregate marketing system” as a basis for appreciating the centrality of this research area for the field of marketing; (5) the nature of marketing in society research today; and (6) a discussion of several research challenges and opportunities for the future.     

Categorizing cognitive responses: An empirical investigation of the cognitive intent congruency between independent raters and original subject raters

Cognitive response coding is relevant for researchers who collect cognitive responses from individuals in the form of answers to open-ended questions or as thoughts produced while exposed to advertising messages. Coding of these cognitive responses is normally completed by a panel of two to four independent judges. This article is the first to empirically investigate cognitive intent congruence aspects underlining the data generated through cognitive response coding. The results show that there are definite gaps in the congruence of cognitive intent between the cognitive coding results that respondents, serving as cognitive response coders of their own thoughts, can provide and those cognitive response patterns provided by independent raters. The current study’s results raise a “yellow” caution flag regarding external independent raters’ ability to produce valid cognitive intent coding patterns that cannot be ignored by future researchers. The authors offer interpretation, implications, limitations, and directions for future research. Karin Braunsberger (braunsbe@stpt.usf.edu) (Ph.D., University of Texas at Arlington) is an associate professor of marketing in the College of Business Administration at the University of South Florida St. Petersburg. Her research interests are in the areas of research methods, consumer thought processes, and services marketing. Her research has been published in theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS), theJournal of Business Research, theJournal of Services Marketing, and others. She serves as a member of the editorial review board forJAMS. R. Brian Buckler (bucklerrb@mail.avila.edu) (Ph.D., University of Texas at Arlington) is an associate professor of marketing at Avila University (since 1996). He teaches both undergraduate and MBA Marketing courses. He is serving a second term as president of the American Marketing Association—Kansas City, Regional Chapter and has also served as director and vice president of Membership. His teaching and research interests include marketing strategy, marketing research, and consumer behavior. David J. Ortinau (dortinau@coba.usf.edu) (Ph.D., Louisiana State University) is a professor of marketing in the College of Business Administration at the University of South Florida, Tampa. His research interests are in the areas of consumer satisfaction and value evaluations/models; services marketing and service quality within selected market segments; research methodologies/scale measurement development; marketing education issues; attitudinal, motivation, and value issues within the consumer behavior framework; and marketing interactive technologies. His scholarly contributions have been published in theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS), theJournal of Retailing, theJournal of Business Research (JBR), theJournal of Health Care Marketing, theJournal of Services Marketing, theJournal of Marketing Education, and others. He is coauthor (with Joseph F. Hair Jr. and Robert P. Bush) ofMarketing Research: Within a Changing Information Environment (3d ed.). He serves as an editorial board member forJAMS andJBR, as well as an ad hoc reviewer for several other journal outlets. His teaching interests focus on marketing research methods and scale measurement, consumer/social behavior, and services marketing.     

Marketing survey research best practices: evidence and recommendations from a review of <Emphasis Type="Italic">JAMS</Emphasis> articles

Survey research methodology is widely used in marketing, and it is important for both the field and individual researchers to follow stringent guidelines to ensure that meaningful insights are attained. To assess the extent to which marketing researchers are utilizing best practices in designing, administering, and analyzing surveys, we review the prevalence of published empirical survey work during the 2006–2015 period in three top marketing journals—Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS), Journal of Marketing (JM), and Journal of Marketing Research (JMR)—and then conduct an in-depth analysis of 202 survey-based studies published in JAMS. We focus on key issues in two broad areas of survey research (issues related to the choice of the object of measurement and selection of raters, and issues related to the measurement of the constructs of interest), and we describe conceptual considerations related to each specific issue, review how marketing researchers have attended to these issues in their published work, and identify appropriate best practices.     

Marketing research: A state-of-the-art review and directions for the twenty-first century

This article provides observations on the state of the art in marketing research during 1987–1997. As such, it updates the earlier state-of-the-art review by Malhotra (1988), which won theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS) Best Article Award. The primary thrust of articles published in theJournal of Marketing Research during 1987–1997 is reviewed to determine important areas of research. In each of these areas, the authors summarize recent developments, highlight the state of the art, offer some critical observations, and identify directions for future research. They present a cross-classification of various techniques and subject areas, and make some observations on the applications of these techniques to address specific substantive and methodological issues in marketing research. The article concludes with some general directions for marketing research in the twenty-first century. Naresh K. Malhotra is Regents’ Professor in the DuPree College of Management at the Georgia Institute of Technology. He is listed in Marquis Who’s Who in America. In an article by Wheatley and Wilson (1987 AMA Educators’ Proceedings), he was ranked number one in the country based on articles published in theJournal of Marketing Research during 1980–1985. He also holds the all-time record for the maximum number of publications in theJournal of Health Care Marketing. He is ranked number one based on publications in theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS) since its inception through Volume 23, 1995. He is also number one based on publications inJAMS during the 10-year period 1986–1995. He has published more than 75 articles in major refereed journals including theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science, theJournal of Marketing Research, theJournal of Consumer Research, Marketing Science, theJournal of Marketing, theJournal of Retailing, theJournal of Health Care Marketing, and leading journals in statistics, management science, and psychology. He was chairman of the Academy of Marketing Science Foundation from 1996 to 1998, president of the Academy of Marketing Science from 1994 to 1996, and chairman of the Board of Governors from 1990 to 1992. He is a Distinguished Fellow of the Academy and Fellow of the Decision Sciences Institute. Mark Peterson is an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Arlington. His research interests include methods, affect, international marketing, and quality of life. His work has been published in theInternational Marketing Review, theJournal of Business Research, and theJournal of Macromarketing. He is on the editorial review board for theJournal of Macromarketing. Susan Bardi Kleiser is an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Texas at Arlington. She holds a Ph.D. in marketing from the University of Cincinnati. Her research interests include consumer decision making, product management, international marketing, marketing ethics, and marketing research and modeling techniques. Her research has appeared inResearch in Marketing, Advances in Consumer Research, and several proceedings.     

Marketing academicians’ perceptions of ethical research and publishing behavior

Many universities have increased the emphasis on faculty research and publication productivity as a means of enhancing their reputation. Such emphasis contributes to the increased competition for available journal space, heightened pressures on the efficiency of the editorial system, and increases the temptation to lower ethical research and publication standards. A survey of 328 marketing academicians about their perceptions of ethical and unethical research and publication practices for academicians, editors, and review board members revealed wide variation among respondents’ perceptions of what constitutes ethical academic conduct. In particular, the respondent’s level of publication experience was found to be significantly related to his/her assessment of the ethicality of research practices. The authors suggest that a recognized code of ethics for the marketing academic community would be valuable in maintaining professional standards, increase justice in the academic reward system, and further the growth of knowledge in our discipline.     

The effects of job autonomy, customer demandingness, and trait competitiveness on salesperson learning, self-efficacy, and performance

Although self-efficacy has been demonstrated to be positively associated with performance-related variables, few studies have looked at its possible antecedents in the context of personal selling. Applying social cognitive theory, this study posits that while self-efficacy positively affects performance, the salesperson's learning effort directly affects self-efficacy. Furthermore, two task-related factors (perceived job autonomy and customer demandingness) and one individual difference variable (trait competitiveness) are proposed to affect salesperson learning effort and self-efficacy. Two empirical studies show consistent results regarding the positive effects of learning on efficacy and efficacy on performance as well as the influences of three exogenous constructs on learning and efficacy. Implications and future research directions are discussed. Guangping (Walter) Wang is an assistant professor of business at Penn State University at Hazleton. He received his Ph.D. in marketing from Louisiana State University in 2000. His research interests include sales management, relationship marketing, database marketing, and e-commerce. His work has appeared or been accepted for publication in theJournal of Vocational Behavior, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Relationship Marketing, Journal of Global Marketing, and a number of national and international conference proceedings. Richard G. Netemeyer is a professor of marketing in the McIntire School of Commerce at the University of Virginia. He received his Ph.D. in marketing from the University of South Carolina in 1986. His research interests are primarily consumer and organizational-behavior issues. His research has appeared in theJournal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Applied Psychology, OBHDP, JAMS, and others.     

Developing global products and marketing strategies: A rejoinder

In this issue of JAMS, Dr. Lyn Amine presents a “comment and an extension” to our previously published article. Such efforts are often constructive, and in this spirit, we present a discussion responding to Dr. Amine’s comments. Our response, combined with Dr. Amine’s comments, hopefully will provide constructive research avenues in international product and marketing strategy development. He has published extensively in the areas of international marketing and retailing. His research and publication areas include international marketing, high tech marketing, and advertising management. His research and publication interests include sales management, international marketing, and retail management.     

在困境中寻找新的起飞点——浅谈新时期高校学报的改革与发展

2011年新闻出版总署印发了《新闻出版业＂十二五＂发展规划》,明确了＂十二五＂时期新闻出版业发展的总体目标,提出向新闻出版强国迈进的战略决策。作为特殊的出版单位,高校学报在新时期须适应时代发展,继承光荣传统,突出期刊特色,寻找与建构新的起飞点。     

Relationship marketing of services—growing interest,emerging perspectives

Relationship marketing is an old idea but a new focus now at the forefront of services marketing practice and academic research. The impetus for its development has come from the maturing of services marketing with the emphasis on quality, increased recognition of potential benefits for the firm and the customer, and technological advances. Accelerating interest and active research are extending the concept to incorporate newer, more sophisticated viewpoints. Emerging perspectives explored here include targeting profitable customers, using the strongest possible strategies for customer bonding, marketing to employees and other stakeholders, and building trust as a marketing tool. Although relationship marketing is developing, more research is needed before it reaches maturity. A baker’s dozen of researchable questions suggests some future directions. holds the J. C. Penney Chair of Retailing Studies, is a professor of Marketing, and is director of the Center for Retailing Studies at Texas A&M University. He is a former national president of the American Marketing Association. His research interests are services marketing, service quality, and retailing strategy. He has published numerous journal articles and books, includingDelivering Quality Service: Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations (Free Press, 1990),Marketing Services: Competing Through Quality (Free Press, 1991), andOn Great Service: A Framework for Action (Free Press, 1995).     

Economics,psychology, and the literature of the subdiscipline of consumer behavior

This paper traces the development of the subdiscipline of marketing known as “consumer behavior” and its literature which grew during the 1950s and 1960s and at an increasing rate during the 1970s. In spite of marketing's roots in economics, it cam to rely more heavily on psychology as a source for conceptual borrowing. It is suggested that this may have resulted from greater congruity between marketing scholars and psychologists with respect to research purposes and philosophies of science.     

Revealed reader preference for marketing journals

In this paper we assess the reading preference for marketing journals by deriving a journal utility scale based on click responses to table of contents postings to the ELMAR virtual community. Use of ELMAR data provides a unique window into journal importance, allowing us to look at table of contents reading behavior rather than citing behavior or attitudinal constructs as has been the case in previous studies. At the time of the study, there were more than 5,100 ELMAR subscribers, easily making this the largest journal ranking study ever undertaken. The external validity of our sample is high since ELMAR subscribers include a high percentage of the population of those interested in scholarly research in marketing. Our results are based on actual choice behavior of subscribers as they simply decide what tables of contents to read. The list of journals included in the study contains 165 different titles posted during the study period, which spanned a year. During that period there were multiple issues posted of these 165 journals, resulting in a replicated field study with high reliability. In fact, our journal reading utility measurement yielded a model with an R² value of .95. We use this model to suggest ways that researchers might come to a richer understanding of the journal consumption process.     

Corporate identity and the societal constituent

Increasingly, the management of corporations’ identities is being conducted in the context of empowered, socially engaged, culturally adept social actors who present organizations with a range of conflicting societal and economic expectations. These social actors, referred to as societal constituents, claim moral legitimacy to influence the decisions and actions of corporations they feel have affected their personal and community space. Firms’ environments come to be regarded as complex webs of social groups whereby the cultural meanings embedded in their corporate brands come to be morphed across the range of social groups. As such, the management of corporate brands becomes a task of symbolic facilitation and managing contradictions. Jay M. Handelman (jhandelman@business.queensu.ca) is an associate professor of marketing in the Queen’s University School of Business, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. His articles have appeared in theJournal of Marketing, theJournal of Consumer Research, and theJournal of Retailing. His current research interests include the application of institutional theory to help understand how product and corporate brands come to be managed in the context of a turbulent social environment. His teaching interests include brand management, marketing ethics, marketing theory and history, and interpretive research methods.     

The antecedents and consequences of customer-centric marketing

As we enter the twenty-first century, the marketing function remains concerned with serving customers and consumers effectively. The authors propose that just as the marketing function gradually shifted from mass marketing to segmented marketing in the twentieth century, it will increasingly move toward customer-centric marketing in the next century. In the practice of customer-centric marketing, the marketing function seeks to fulfill the needs and wants of each individual customer. The antecedents of customer-centric marketing are the increasing pressure on firms to improve marketing productivity, increasing market diversity in household and business markets, and technology applicability. On the basis of the shift toward customer-centric marketing, the authors expect increased importance of marketing as a “supply management” function, customer outsourcing, cocreation marketing, fixedcost marketing, and customer-centric organizations. This article highlights the implications of customer-centric marketing as well as the boundary conditions that will affect its adoption. Jagdish N. Sheth is the Kellstadt Professor of Marketing in the Gouizeta Business School at Emory University. He has published 26 books and more than 200 articles in marketing and other business disciplines. His book,The Theory of Buyer Behavior (with John A. Howard), is a classic in the field of consumer behavior and is one of the most cited works in marketing. His other books includeMarketing Theory: Evolution and Evaluation (with David Gardner and Dennis Garrett) andConsumption Values and Market Choices: Theory and Applications (with Bruce Newman and Barbara Gross). Rajendra S. Sisodia is Trustee Professor of Marketing at Bentley College. Previously, he was an associate professor of marketing and director of executive programs at George Mason University and an assistant professor of marketing at Boston University. He has a Ph.D. in marketing from Columbia University. He has published more than 40 articles in journals such asHarvard Business Review, Journal of Business Strategy, Marketing Letters, andMarketing Management. He has also authored about two dozen cases, primarily on strategic and marketing issues in the telecommunications industry, as well as a number of telecommunications industry and company analyses. Arun Sharma is an associate professor of marketing at the University of Miami. He has published more than 30 articles in marketing and his interests are in the area of market and marketing evolution.     

Literary criticism and the history of marketing thought: A new perspective on “reading” marketing theory

This paper proposes the addition of concepts drawn from literary criticism to philosophical and historical ones in order to provide insights into “reading” marketing theory. The paper sets forth three modes of literary criticism applicable to the analysis of marketing theory—psychobiographical, editorial, and structural. It offers as an illustrative example a reading of the history of Ernest Dichter's motivation research movement using these methods. The addition of literary analysis demonstrates how textual clues can enrich the historian's study of the rise and fall of marketing phenomena over time.     

Dynamic relationships with customers: High-variety strategies

A proposal is made that one way to compete effectively in the 21st century is to meet customers’ needs over time better than the competition by offering a high-variety product line. More variety in a product line can make it more likely that each consumer finds exactly the option he or she desires (customization strategy). In addition, more variety in a product line can allow each consumer to enjoy a diversity of options over time (variety-seeking strategy). Other issues such as profitability, cost considerations, how much variety to offer and where in the delivery chain to offer it, and when does too much variety cause confusion or overload are also discussed. Barbara E. Kahn is a professor of marketing at The Wharton School. She received a B.A. in English literature at the University of Rochester, and an M.B.A. in marketing and statistics and an M.Phil. and Ph.D. in marketing from Columbia University. Professor Kahn has over two dozen publications. These include journal articles in marketing, consumer research, retailing, and statistics. She has also recently publishedGrocery Revolution: The New Focus on the Consumer (Addison-Wesley, 1997) with Leigh McAlister. Professor Kahn is on the editorial board ofJournal of Marketing Research, Journal of Marketing, Marketing Science, Journal of Consumer Research, andMarketing Letters, and on the policy board ofJournal of Consumer Research. She has consulted with various services, telecommunications, and consumer package goods companies. She was also the Hakuhodo Advertising Agency Visiting Scholar at University of Tokyo, summer 1993, and a Visiting Academic at University of Sydney, July through December 1996.     

Transaction cost economics and its uses in marketing

Scholarship at the intersection of transaction cost economics (TCE) and marketing has enjoyed an impressive record of growth over the past three decades, and the future promises more of the same. Following Erin Anderson’s perceptive uses of TCE in her 1982 dissertation, the field of marketing has made many constructive uses of and contributions to TCE, where the latter include broadening the reach of TCE, posing important challenges, and identifying opportunities still to be addressed. Given this history, we advance the proposition that the relation between TCE and marketing has been and should be a two-way street. In considering the scope for future research, we give special attention to issues of asymmetric costs, the dynamics of governance, and disequilibrium contracting. We also discuss the four precepts of pragmatic methodology, with special emphasis on prediction and empirical testing. The Appendix provides added perspective on the evolving “science of organization” of which TCE is a part.