Replications and Extensions in Marketing: Rarely Published but Quite Contrary
Article comments
Postprint version. Published in International Journal of Research in Marketing, Volume 11, Issue 3, June 1994, pages 233-248.
Publisher URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(94)90003-5
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
Raymond Hubbard and J. Scott Armstrong. "Replications and Extensions in Marketing: Rarely Published but Quite Contrary" Marketing Papers (1994).
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/j_scott_armstrong/118