It is recognised that existing theories of Consumer Decision Making (CDM) are not well suited for financial services and there have been calls for development of a new conceptual model. This article reviews prominent models of CDM and identifies strengths and limitations. A new conceptual model that is applicable to financial services is developed. An important element of the model is the recognition that the components interact rather than a consumer following a linear progression through a series of stages. The new model better reflects the iterative decision-making process relevant to financial services and enhances marketers' understanding of the process and thus their ability to influence it to increase the likelihood of positive outcomes for all. The model has three main components: inputs, processes and outcomes. Inputs include the purchase situation (contextual and environmental variables), consumer characteristics (psychological and social influences) and information sources (marketing mix and interpersonal). Processes include need arousal, information utility, criteria development and evaluation of alternatives. Outcomes include the decision (that may be to abort the purchase), the purchase itself and post-decision evaluation. Further research is required to test the relationships between the variables in different contexts, and thus enable refinement and/or validation of the model. A review of consumer decision-making models and development of a new model for financial services 2 AbstractIt is recognised that existing theories of consumer decision-making are not well suited to financial services and there have been calls for development of a new conceptual model. This paper reviews prominent models of consumer decision-making and identifies strengths and limitations. A new conceptual model that is applicable to financial services is developed. An important element of the model is the recognition that the components interact rather than a consumer following a linear progression through a series of stages. The new model better reflects the iterative decision-making process relevant to financial services and enhances marketers' understanding of the process and thus their ability to influence it to increase the likelihood of positive outcomes for all. The model has three main components: Inputs, processes and outcomes. Inputs include the purchase situation (contextual and environmental variables), consumer characteristics (psychological and social influences), and information sources (marketing mix and interpersonal). Processes include need arousal, information utility, criteria development and evaluation of alternatives. Outcomes include the decision (which may be to abort the purchase), the purchase itself, and post-decision evaluation.Further research is required to test the relationships between the variables in different contexts, and thus enable refinement and/or validation of the model.
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to assess the level of international involvement in the editorial boards and content of the leading journals of the marketing discipline to investigate a reported bias against non‐US material.Design/methodology/approachThe research employed two approaches: editorial board and content analysis of ten leading marketing journals, and interviews with an expert panel of senior marketing academics.FindingsThe top journals of the marketing journal were found to have low levels of international involvement, with high proportions of both US authors and data, and US membership of editorial boards. The editorial board analysis also revealed institutional links with journal boards, and a network of overlapping membership between the editorial boards. The expert panel provided divergent views on reasons for the USA dominance, but the board analysis seemed to best fit with the suggestion of networks of scholars who are naturally inclined to favor research that fits their world view.Practical implicationsTo improve publishing success under the current status quo, scholars can emulate the favored (US) research approach and writing style; network with the “right” people; or raise a new research paradigm to dominance. Journal editors can increase the diversity in editorial boards to encourage international involvement in their publications.Originality/valueThe research combines traditional empirical investigation with qualitative input via an expert panel to provide new insight into barriers to global dissemination of scholarly research.
Purpose -Potential ethnocentric biases in stated preference journal rankings are reviewed and revealed preference ranking methods are investigated. The aim of the paper is to identify an approach to ranking journals that minimises ethnocentric biases and better represents the international impact of research. Design/methodology/approach -Coverage of marketing journals in Ulrich's, EBSCO, SSCI, JCR, Scopus and Google Scholar is explored. Citing references to 20 articles are analysed to determine citation time lags and explore the content of SSCI, Scopus and Google Scholar. To further review the extent of citation coverage, h-index scores are generated for ten marketing journals using data from SSCI, Scopus and Google Scholar. In total, 36 marketing journals are ranked using the g-index and Google Scholar data and results are compared to ten published rankings. Findings -Stated preference ranking studies of marketing journals rely on US-based respondents. The coverage of EBSCO, SSCI, JCR and Scopus databases is not representative of marketing's literature as they have few international sources, and a disproportionate coverage of US-based journals. Google Scholar provides broader international coverage. The Impact Factor may be inappropriate for marketing journals as a large proportion of citations occur more than five years post-publication. Results indicate that the g-index is a superior approach to measuring the impact of marketing journals internationally. Practical implications -Exposure of the limitations in existing ranking methods should encourage improvements in the development and use of journal rankings. Originality/value -The investigations present original evidence to support long-term concerns about approaches to journal ranking and citation analysis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.