Replications hardly possible: reporting practice in top-tier marketing journals

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight the role of replications for science, and in particular the knowledge development process. Design/methodology/approach Descriptive research on the disclosure of sample parameters which are needed for replication was conducted. The analysis includes 2,982 studies from four top-tier marketing journals. Findings Published parameters are insufficient for replication and, therefore, impede knowledge development. Originality/value The paper offers a unique data set for further investigation. In total, 2,982 studies from the defined journals (Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research and Marketing Science) were analyzed. Hereby this paper enables insights into reporting practices of current marketing research and highlights the role of replication research in validating earlier research. It empirically shows, to the authors' best knowledge for the first time, that the insufficient reporting is one of the major reasons for the lack of replications.

Understanding consumer perceptions of luxury brands

“…This coverage provides five different tests of the research questions, which is very extensive in empirical luxury research which is typically confined to one brand, or one category, and/or one country (e.g., a recent selection of papers, Chang et al, 2019; de Kerviler & Rodriguez, 2019; Lunardo & Mouangue, 2019), and often draws on student or M-turk samples. This real luxury consumer, multi-category, multi-country test means any findings within the paper have already extensive robustness and generalizability, something considered crucial to quality research by many (e.g., Easley et al, 2000; Ehrenberg, 2016; Lehmann & Bengart, 2016; Royne, 2018; Schmidt & Oh, 2016). This research is also an extension of Romaniuk and Sharp (2000) into the luxury sector, which is another important contribution to marketing science.…”

How Small Sample Size and Replication Can Increase Accuracy in Experiments: Lessons that Marketing May Learn from Agricultural Scientific Method

“…This observation has the capacity to inform the debate within the marketing literature on the very low published rates of replication of both types within the discipline (Hubbard and Armstrong, 1994; Hubbard and Vetter, 1996; Kerr et al, 2016; Lehmann and Bengart, 2016; Morrison et al, 2010; Park et al, 2015). Some of these concerns have been expressed with exceeding bluntness.…”

Research Methods: Issues and Research Direction

“…Probability sampling methods are preferred mostly by statistical organizations, while nonprobability sampling approaches are preferred mostly by business organizations, marketers and researchers (Etikan & Bala, 2017). Generally, nonprobability sampling methods have the advantages of ease of use, ease of securing cooperation from research respondents, and cost efficiency, but have the disadvantages of lack of representativeness and generalizability of research results from sample to the population which can limit research replication (Levy & Lemeshow, 2013;Lehmann & Bengart, 2016;Sarstedt et al, 2017).…”