 Does marketing research suffer from methods myopia?Donna F. Davis, Susan L. Golicic, Courtney N. Boerstler, Sunny Choi and Hanmo Oh Journal of Business Research, 2013, vol. 66, issue 9, 1245-1250 Abstract: The marketing discipline is repeatedly criticized for overreliance on a small set of quantitative methods which has the potential to delimit the scope of inquiries and introduce inherent method bias that undermines the trustworthiness of findings. The purpose of this research is to investigate the level of methods diversity in marketing research and to consider the impact of methods diversity on the marketing discipline. To accomplish these objectives, this study reports the results of an extensive content analysis of articles published in five leading marketing journals over a 20-year period (1990–2009): Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, and Marketing Science. Results reveal a disturbing downward trend in methods diversity resulting from increasing reliance on two methods, experiments and modeling. Keywords: Marketing research; Research methods; Multiple methods; Method bias; Content analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:66:y:2013:i:9:p:1245-1250 DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.020 Access Statistics for this article Journal of Business Research is currently edited by A. G. Woodside More articles in Journal of Business Research from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.