Search results

The purpose of this article is to determine the uses of mixed method research designs published in major marketing journals.

This study involved a content analysis of 2,166 articles published between 2003 and 2009 in nine prominent marketing journals.

A total of 34 mixed method studies implemented data‐collection procedures sequentially (79 percent), eight implemented them concurrently (19 percent) and one combined both sequential and concurrent procedures (2 percent). On the whole, priority was skewed more toward quantitative strands, with 27 articles prioritizing quantitative data (63 percent), three articles prioritizing qualitative data (7 percent), and 13 articles prioritizing both equally (30 percent).

It is clear that marketing scholars recognize the benefit of mixing qualitative and quantitative research; however, as a discipline we are not demonstrating knowledge of the mixed method literature or procedures, as only one article recognized or mentioned knowledge of mixed method procedures or cited mixed method research.

This study provides guidance for researchers in identifying design types appropriate for various rationales or research objectives and models of different design types that have been published in marketing journals. In addition, implications for designing mixed methods studies in marketing include highlighting the need for scholars to specifically address issues such as the timing and priority given to each data type (i.e. sequential or concurrent), and the integration (or mixing) of the both data types.

Until now, the role of mixed methods designs in marketing has not been the subject of formal examination. The delineation of the major forms in mixed method designs provides a framework for looking at such design types, which helps to provide more credibility to the field of marketing by providing examples of research designs that are substantially different than single strand studies.

The purpose of this article is to determine the mix of qualitative and quantitative research published in major marketing journals.

This study involved a content analysis of 1,195 articles published between 1993 and 2002 in three prominent marketing journals.

It was found that 24.80 per cent of articles employed qualitative methods in some form, and 46.28 per cent quantitative research. The main justification provided for use of qualitative methods was the ability to provide more insight or a deeper understanding of the phenomenon under investigation. No increase was seen, however, in the amount (year by year) of qualitative research published over this period. This paper accounts for the continued dominance of quantitative research using linked historical, social and practical arguments.

The issue of method is central to marketing research. Understanding of the actual (as distinct from espoused) orientation of marketing researchers and journals is an aid to researchers intent on publishing their work.

This is the largest content analysis conducted of research in marketing and, in addition to the findings of the analysis, the explanation offered for the dominance of quantitative methods is of value to researchers.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is no study that investigates the historical roots of quantitative paradigm hegemony over the qualitative paradigm in marketing using a critical lens. The purpose of this paper is to stimulate thoughtful reflections among marketing scholars so that the dialog among paradigms expands, the stale paradigmatic debates disappear, and the marketing discipline evolves and contributes to the actual functioning of markets and the welfare of society.

This study is conducted in the light of foucauldian genealogy through the analysis of historical materials that Foucault called discourses, a set of languages, systems of thinking and governality techniques that determine how individuals or organizations come to be disciplined. In this paper, the concept of discourse mainly refers to visible rituals and practices by which marketing researchers have been psychologically and behaviorally shaped to reproduce and perpetuate a hypothetical-deductive mainstream within their discipline.

This paper intends to stimulate a dialog among marketing scholars about expanding paradigms so that stale debates disappear, and marketing disciplines proves their scientific status by better contributing to the functioning of markets and the welfare of society. As an evolving social science, marketing requires new theory, new concepts and new research methods.

The intellectual contribution of this paper lies in its intention to alert marketing researchers about the danger we are exposing our discipline to by promoting imperialist traditions and standardization of thinking.

This paper aims to represent a response to issues raised in the continuing quantitative-qualitative debate by Valtakoski (2020). Which appeared in a Journal of Services Marketing (JSM) special issue on qualitative research in service-oriented research.

The authors performed a content analysis of 1,268 papers that were published in JSM (1987-2019). In addition, the authors had data that is held in JSM’s manuscript central submission portal.

The analysis shows that while there is a dominance of quantitative methods in the journal, the proportion of qualitative papers is growing. During 2014-2019, 83.4 per cent of submitted papers to JSM represented quantitative research and 14 per cent represented qualitative research; however, 75 per cent of accepted papers were quantitative and 25 per cent were qualitative/mixed methods. Thus, the proportion of published qualitative studies are increasing and have a higher chance of receiving an acceptance decision compared to quantitative studies. Additionally, the largest percentage of qualitative papers published in JSM derive from corresponding authors outside of North America.

Service researchers who opt to use inductive research methods, which tend to use qualitative research, will not confront discrimination based solely upon the use of a research methodology among editors or reviewers at JSM.

JSM welcomes qualitative research that has rich practical implications.

This study is one of the first to provide authors with a detailed analysis and responses to the qualitative-quantitative debate in marketing.

This research aims to investigate how preference for marketing research methodology (quantitative vs qualitative) is contingent on the thinking orientation (analytic vs holistic) of the researchers.

Thinking orientation was measured and then manipulated in laboratory experiments. Cross-cultural evidence was sought by comparing Western and East Asian participants.

Results demonstrate that researchers with an analytic (holistic) thinking orientation tend to perceive quantitative (qualitative) methodology more favorably. Further, the need to offer reasons in support of the choice strengthened the effect of thinking orientation.

Understanding researchers’ preferences for one research methodology over the other has broad relevance for external constituents, as it involves a great deal of managerial commitment in terms of time and money and can affect the results of the research.

This is the first study to investigate factors that underlie researchers’ choice regarding research methodology, and it also extends the literature on analytic versus holistic thinking orientation in the marketing field.

Discusses ways in which qualitative techniques might be incorporated in quantitative research and quantitative techniques in qualitative research ‐ a transfer of techniques. Explores the use of neuro‐linguistic programming (NLP) and projective techniques in quantitative research. Reports the results of customizing a self‐completion questionnaire to a respondent’s preferred representational system (PRS). This application of NLP produced encouraging findings. Provides suggestions for further research. Describes an example of how NLP and projective techniques can benefit a quantitative study with a case study in which TRBI’s BrandWorks was used. Suggests that, although the adoption by qualitative researchers of techniques used in quantitative research focuses on computer applications, the recent academic interest in the use of text analysers has not been matched by practitioners. Discusses issues related to quality, validity, transparency and value, and reports the findings of a survey of the largest qualitative marketing research suppliers. Finally, examines the use of correspondence analysis and describes ways in which correspondence analysis might benefit the qualitative researcher.

The increasing use of Internet‐based qualitative and quantitative research is based on both “pull” and “push” factors. “Pull” factors include research clients’ demand for faster turnaround and low cost, while marketing research agencies’ naturally competitive endeavours represent the “push”. Attempts “to clear the e‐mist” regarding research on the Internet and examines the main types of Internet based research (qualitative and quantitative) as well as seven “sins” for Internet researchers – based on interviews with leading providers of Internet market research and IT specialists. Concludes that there is a need for both practitioners and academics to ensure their houses are kept in order and to respect the rights of respondents and clients and, just as importantly, be seen to be doing this and so keep possible interference by governments at bay.

The purpose of this study is to examine the prevalence of mixed methods research across several business and management fields and to gauge the level of acceptance of mixed methods within these fields.

The methodology employed for this study involved synthesizing the findings from six large‐scale methodological scans of business and management discipline journals in seven fields: marketing, international business, strategic management, organizational behaviour, operations management, entrepreneurship and human resource management.

The study finds that quantitative studies dominate all seven fields (76 per cent of empirical articles) followed by mixed methods (14 per cent of empirical articles) and qualitative studies (10 per cent of empirical articles). In applying the framework for acceptance levels, it would seem there exists minimal acceptance of mixed methods across these fields.

The study has limitations related to the coverage of different disciplines and differences in sample sets. More extensive research is planned for the future and will involve an expanded mixed method prevalence rate study across additional business and management fields.

The growing use of mixed methods has practical implications for research training and capacity building within business schools. The study points to the need to develop research capacity through the introduction of postgraduate courses in mixed methods and advanced research skills training for existing researchers.

Mixed methods is a relatively new and emerging methodological movement. This paper attempts to gauge the use and level of acceptance of mixed methods across a diverse range of business and management discipline areas.

Given the focus of the special issue, the present paper combines both the academic and the practitioner perspectives to highlight several issues and emerging trends that will shape the role of marketing research in the new millennium. These include a redefinition of the marketing researcher, the on‐going nature of marketing research, qualitative research, quantitative research, international marketing research, Internet marketing research, and ethical issues in marketing research.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the role of qualitative research in marketing and the challenges faced by researchers in justifying the need and the quality of interpretive research. The paper reviews the fluctuating trends in employing qualitative research to build marketing theories, and touches on the subject of paradigm shift in research approaches in marketing. It further reviews main rhetorical and practical challenges researchers face in qualitative inquiry in marketing.

This is a conceptual paper discussing the role of qualitative research in marketing discipline and its challenges.

One of the main topics discussed in this paper is understanding the nature of qualitative research and its inherent weaknesses and how to overcome them. Some of the challenges highlighted in the paper include: contextually embedded findings, vague standards for data analysis, presentation of voluminous amount of qualitative data and theoretical criteria for judging the quality of studies. Insights from real‐life experiences in conducing qualitative research in bank marketing reveal practical issues such as participant recruitment and engagement, ethical soundness, triangulation, and perpetual assurance of research quality.

The paper provides personal commentaries on the experiences of a researcher in conducting purely qualitative academic study in marketing. It offers insights into practical difficulties encountered when performing qualitative studies and offers a glimpse into solutions and alternatives incorporated by the researcher, which could be of use to aspiring marketing researchers.