Replications and Extensions in Marketing - Rarely Published But Quite Contrary
International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 11, pp. 233-248, 1994
22 Pages Posted: 21 Jul 2008
Date Written: July 21, 2008
Abstract
Replication is rare in marketing. Of 1,120 papers sampled from three major marketing journals, none were replications. Only 1.8% of the papers were extensions, and they consumed 1.1% of the journal space. On average, these extensions appeared seven years after the original study. The publication rate for such works has been decreasing since the 1970s. Published extensions typically produced results that conflicted with the original studies; of the 20 extensions published, 12 conflicted with the earlier results, and only 3 provided full confirmation. Published replications do not attract as many citations after publication as do the original studies, even when the results fail to support the original studies.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
Are Null Results Becoming an Endangered Species in Marketing?
-
Entrepreneurial Orientation and Business Performance - A Replication Study
By Hermann Frank, Alexander Kessler, ...
-
Why We Don't Really Know What Statistical Significance Means: A Major Educational Failure
-
Why We Don't Really Know What ‘Statistical Significance’ Means: A Major Educational Failure
-
Cross-Cultural Comparison of Food in the Children's Media Environment in New Zealand and Japan
By Sandy Bulmer, Lynne C. Eagle, ...
-
The Effects of Negative Publicity on Consumer Attitudes: A Replication and Extension
-
Forecasting Elections Using Expert Surveys: An Application to U.S. Presidential Elections
-
Editorial: Well Documented Articles Achieve More Impact
By Sönke Albers