Validation in marketing experiments revisited

This paper reviews a high impact article, "Checking the success of manipulations in marketing experiments" (Perdue and Summers, 1986). The article considers Perdue and Summers' (1986) contribution to experimental research and uses citation analysis to assess its value, usefulness, and impact on the body of marketing experiment literature. Woodside's (2009) citation analysis and Armstrong's (2003) criteria of importance indicate that Perdue and Summers' (1986) article receives high citation references and substantial influence on experimental studies. The main contribution of Perdue and Summers' article is demonstrating ways to enhance validity of experimental research by appropriate manipulation and confounding checks before and during the experiment. The secondary contribution comes from initiating debates in marketing literature on demand artifact consideration, timing, informational value of manipulation, and confounding checks in theory testing. Perdue and Summers' article earns a seminal status within marketing experimental literatures through citation references and its usefulness. The review concludes by updating the current state of manipulation and confounding check measure in marketing experiments, and extends and qualifies Perdue and Summers' (1986) study. The update uses the same procedure utilised by Perdue and Summers' (1986) study to assess the use of validity measures in experimental research reported in the Journal of Marketing Research for 1987 to 1996.