Conjunctionitis: a call for clarity in construct definitions

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to determine the extent to which the use of coordinating conjunctions enhances or impairs definitional clarity.

Design/methodology/approach

In two studies, a sample of 736 construct definitions from the Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research and Journal of Consumer Research over a 30-year period was judged for ambiguity and vagueness by both academic and lay judges.

Findings

The authors demonstrate that constructing definitions using both “and” and “or” increases the ambiguity and vagueness of the construct’s meaning. The most frequently used conjunction is “and” which appeared in 42 per cent of the definitions. A significant percentage (26 per cent) contain the conjunction “or.”

Research limitations/implications

A framework for understanding alternative interpretations of “and” or “or” is developed. Five recommendations are proposed for evaluating the use of “and” and “or” in construct definitions. Theorists in all academic fields should not use both “and” and “or” in the same construct definition.

Practical implications

A five-step process is proposed for evaluating the use of “and” and “or” in construct definitions. Theorists should not use both “and” and “or” in the same construct definition.

Originality/value

This is the first exploration of how specific wording patterns used in construct definitions in academic research affect the clarity of the definition.

Citation

Voss, K.E., Zablah, A.R., Huang, Y.-S.(S). and Chakraborty, G. (2020), "Conjunctionitis: a call for clarity in construct definitions", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 5, pp. 1147-1159. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-07-2018-0470