IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v21y2002i1p1-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Mission of Marketing Science

Author

Listed:
  • Steven M. Shugan

    (Warrington College of Business Administration, University of Florida, 201 Bryan Hall, Campus Box 117155, Gainesville, FL 32611-7155)

Abstract

No abstract available

Suggested Citation

  • Steven M. Shugan, 2002. "The Mission of Marketing Science," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 1-13.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:21:y:2002:i:1:p:1-13
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.21.1.1.162
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.21.1.1.162
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.21.1.1.162?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter M. Guadagni & John D. C. Little, 1983. "A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 203-238.
    2. Baumgartner, H. & Pieters, R., 2000. "The Influence of Marketing Journals : A Citation Analysis of the Discipline and its Sub-areas," Discussion Paper 2000-123, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    3. Baumgartner, H. & Pieters, R., 2000. "The Influence of Marketing Journals : A Citation Analysis of the Discipline and its Sub-areas," Other publications TiSEM 616da55c-55fe-4ca4-88c0-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. David N. Laband, 1990. "Is There Value-Added from the Review Process in Economics?: Preliminary Evidence from Authors," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 105(2), pages 341-352.
    5. Füsun Gönül & Kannan Srinivasan, 1993. "Modeling Multiple Sources of Heterogeneity in Multinomial Logit Models: Methodological and Managerial Issues," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 213-229.
    6. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1994. "Facts and Myths about Refereeing," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 153-163, Winter.
    7. Glenn Ellison, 2002. "The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 947-993, October.
    8. Abbie Griffin & John R. Hauser, 1993. "The Voice of the Customer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27.
    9. Abel P. Jeuland & Steven M. Shugan, 1983. "Managing Channel Profits," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 239-272.
    10. J. Scott Armstrong, 1979. "Advocacy and Objectivity in Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 423-428, May.
    11. Richard H. Thaler, 2008. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 15-25, 01-02.
    12. John G. Lynch , Jr. & Dan Ariely, 2000. "Wine Online: Search Costs Affect Competition on Price, Quality, and Distribution," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 83-103, April.
    13. Eugene W. Anderson & Mary W. Sullivan, 1993. "The Antecedents and Consequences of Customer Satisfaction for Firms," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 125-143.
    14. Erin Anderson & Barton Weitz, 1989. "Determinants of Continuity in Conventional Industrial Channel Dyads," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 310-323.
    15. Laband, David N & Piette, Michael J, 1994. "Favoritism versus Search for Good Papers: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Behavior of Journal Editors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(1), pages 194-203, February.
    16. Gregory, Alan & Hua, Shan & Tharyan, Rajesh, 2018. "In search of beta," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 425-441.
    17. Richard Staelin, 1998. "Editorial: A Discussion of Bait and Switch," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 271-272.
    18. Joshua S. Gans & George B. Shepherd, 1994. "How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 165-179, Winter.
    19. Blank, Rebecca M, 1991. "The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1041-1067, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vikas Mittal & Lawrence Feick & Feisal Murshed, 2008. "Publish and Prosper: The Financial Impact of Publishing by Marketing Faculty," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 430-442, 05-06.
    2. Steven M. Shugan, 2009. "—Relevancy Is Robust Prediction, Not Alleged Realism," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 991-998, 09-10.
    3. Juan Miguel Campanario, 2018. "Journals that Rise from the Fourth Quartile to the First Quartile in Six Years or Less: Mechanisms of Change and the Role of Journal Self-Citations," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-15, November.
    4. Steven M. Shugan, 2007. "Editorial: Thanks to the Many Individuals Who Make Publication of Possible," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 285-292, 05-06.
    5. Steven M. Shugan, 2003. "Editorial: Compartmentalized Reviews and Other Initiatives: Should Marketing Scientists Review Manuscripts in Consumer Behavior?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 151-160.
    6. Steven M. Shugan, 2007. "The Editor's Secrets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 589-595, 09-10.
    7. Steven M. Shugan, 2006. "Editorial: Fifty Years of," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 551-555, 11-12.
    8. Antonia Andrade & Raúl González-Jonte & Juan Miguel Campanario, 2009. "Journals that increase their impact factor at least fourfold in a few years: The role of journal self-citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(2), pages 515-528, August.
    9. Olivier Toubia, 2022. "Editorial: A New Chapter or a New Page for Marketing Science ?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 1-6, January.
    10. anonymous, 2006. "Editorial: Thanks to the Many Individuals Who Make Publication of Possible," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 293-300, 07-08.
    11. Wierenga, Berend, 2021. "The study of important marketing issues in an evolving field," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 18-28.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Steven M. Shugan, 2006. "Editorial: Fifty Years of," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 551-555, 11-12.
    2. Steven M. Shugan, 2008. "Editorial—Introduction to the Special Classics Issue," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 9-11, 01-02.
    3. Bruno Frey, 2005. "Problems with Publishing: Existing State and Solutions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 173-190, April.
    4. Bruno S. Frey, "undated". "Publishing as Prostitution? Choosing Between One�s Own Ideas and Academic Failure," IEW - Working Papers 117, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    5. Ofer Azar, 2003. "Rejections and the Importance of First Response Times (Or: How Many Rejections Do Others Receive?)," General Economics and Teaching 0309002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Ofer H. Azar, 2006. "The Academic Review Process: How Can We Make it More Efficient?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 50(1), pages 37-50, March.
    7. Ruth Ben-Yashar & Shmuel Nitzan, 2001. "Are Referees Sufficiently Informed About The Editor'S Practice?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 1-11, August.
    8. Marshall H. Medoff, 2003. "Editorial Favoritism in Economics?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(2), pages 425-434, October.
    9. Ofer H. Azar, 2005. "The Review Process in Economics: Is It Too Fast?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(2), pages 482-491, October.
    10. Azar Ofer H., 2015. "A Model of the Academic Review Process with Informed Authors," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 865-889, April.
    11. Glenn Ellison, 2002. "The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 947-993, October.
    12. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna, 2017. "What do Editors Maximize? Evidence from Four Leading Economics Journals," NBER Working Papers 23282, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Jens Prüfer & David Zetland, 2010. "An auction market for journal articles," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 379-403, December.
    14. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna, 2020. "What Do Editors Maximize? Evidence from Four Economics Journals," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(1), pages 195-217, March.
    15. Atal, Vidya, 2010. "Do journals accept too many papers?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 229-232, May.
    16. Damien Besancenot & Kim Huynh & Joao Faria, 2012. "Search and research: the influence of editorial boards on journals’ quality," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 687-702, October.
    17. R. Preston McAfee, 2016. "Edifying Editing," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 61(1), pages 110-118, March.
    18. Heintzelman Martin & Nocetti Diego, 2009. "Where Should we Submit our Manuscript? An Analysis of Journal Submission Strategies," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-28, September.
    19. Sascha Baghestanian & Sergey V. Popov, 2018. "On publication, refereeing and working hard," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 51(4), pages 1419-1459, November.
    20. Paul Gopuran Devassy Bino & Sasidharan Subash & Ananthakrishnan Ramanathan, 2005. "Concentration in Knowledge Output: A case of Economics Journals," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 2(2), pages 261-279, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:21:y:2002:i:1:p:1-13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.