An Empirical Investigation of Research Standards for Marketing Faculty at AACSB-Accredited Business Schools

Abstract

The article reports on tests of several hypotheses about scholarly research in marketing, such as the tradeoffs among professional activities, the emphasis on research quality, the importance of journal evaluations in assessing performance, and the criteria used to evaluate journals. These issues differ based on factors like professorial rank and the presence of a doctoral program in marketing.

Two Decades of Contributions to Marketing and Public Policy: An Analysis of Research Published in Journal of Public Policy & Marketing

“…To reflect research contributions from such areas, a fourth major area, representing societal issues, was included in the category structure. − 1992− Journal b 198619871988198919901992199319951998 The impact factor is an indicator of a journal's current influence on knowledge development (for a more detailed review of the measure, see Zinkhan and Leigh 1999). Data are from Zinkhan and Leigh (1999) and Journal Citation Reports Annual SSCI Impact Factor c, d…”

“…The publication analysis begins with a brief examination of general article authorship, an issue of importance for many academic researchers with respect to tenure and promotion within their institutions (Floyd, Schroeder, and Finn 1994; Schroeder, Langrehr, and Floyd 1995; Urban, Wayland, and McDermott 1992). During its first 20 years, JPP&M published 455 articles by 602 different authors from 272 institutions.…”

A New Tool for Identifying Research Standards and Evaluating Research Performance

“…For journals that are not on any published list, several aspects have been suggested for determining its quality including the use of blind review, the acceptance rate (however, see Van Fleet, McWilliams, & Siegel, 2000, for arguments on why not to use acceptance rate), the number of years the journal has been published, and other factors (Urban et al, 1992). Soutar and Murphy (2009) suggest a more systematic approach that is widely applicable.…”

“…Bak, Vitell, & Rose, 2000; Noble et al, 2010; Seggie & Griffith, 2009). And then there is the issue of how the quality and quantity of publications should be jointly considered in performance evaluations (Urban, Wayland, & McDermott, 1992).…”