Benefits and challenges of conducting multiple methods research in marketing

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 467-479

  Davis, Donna F ^a   Golicic, Susan L ^b   Boerstler, Courtney N ^c  

^a TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

^c HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Multiple methods research; Research design; Research methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955091823     PISSN: 00920703     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11747-010-0204-7     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Alise, M. A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). A continuation of the paradigm wars? Prevalence rates of methodological approaches across the social/behavioral Sciences. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(2), 103-126.
2. Boyer, K. K., & Swink, M. L. (2009). Empirical elephants-Why multiple methods are essential to quality research in operations and supply chain management. Journal of Operations Management, 26, 337-348.
3. Campbell, D., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 54, 297-312.
4. Carter, C. R., Sanders, N. R., & Dong, Y. (2008). Paradigms, revolutions and tipping points: The need for using multiple methodologies within the field of supply chain management. Journal of Operations Management, 26, 693-696.
5. Commuri, S., & Gentry, J. W. (2005). Resource allocation in households with women as chief wage earners. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(2), 185-195.
6. Coulter, R. A., Price, L. L., & Feick, L. (2003). Rethinking the origins of involvement and brand commitment: Insights from postsocialist central Europe. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 151-169.
7. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Mapping the field of mixed methods research. Journal of Multiple Methods Research, 3(2), 95-108.
8. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
9. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
10. Dahl, D. W., & Moreau, P. (2002). The influence and value of analogical thinking during new product ideation. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 47-60.
11. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The logic of naturalistic inquiry. In N. K. Denzin (Ed.), Sociological methods: A sourcebook. New York: McGraw Hill.
12. Deshpande, R. (1983). Paradigms lost: On theory and method in research in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 47(3), 101-110.
13. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
14. Hirschman, E. (1986). Humanistic inquiry in marketing research: Philosophy, method, and criteria. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(3), 237-249.
15. Hudson, L. A., & Ozanne, J. L. (1988). Alternative ways of seeking knowledge in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(1), 508-521.
16. Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602-611.
17. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
18. Kirkwood, J. A., & Campbell-Hunt, C. (2007). Using multiple paradigm research methodologies to gain new insights into entrepreneurial motivations. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 15(3), 219-241.
19. Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
20. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
21. QSR International. (2008). NVivo, Version 8 (qualitative data analysis software). Melbourne, Australia: QSR International Pty Ltd.
22. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
23. Pfeffer, J. (2007). A modest proposal: How we might change the process and product of managerial research. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1334-1345.
24. Stewart, D. W. (2009). The role of method: Some parting thoughts from a departing editor. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(4), 381-383.
25. Stewart, D. W. (2007). New and improved! A look at the future. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(1), 1-4.
26. Stremersch, S., Verniers, I., & Verhoef, P. C. (2007). The quest for citations: Drivers of article impact. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 171-193.
27. Svensson, G. (2006). The paradoxnoia of top journal(s) in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 40(11/12), 1153-1168.
28. Tashakkori, A. (2010). Are we there yet?: The state of the mixed methods community. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(4), 287-291.
29. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combing qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
30. Tellis, G. J., Chandy, R. K., & Ackerman, D. S. (1999). In search of diversity: The record of major marketing journals. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(1), 120-131.
31. Venable, B. T., Rose, G. M., Bush, V. D., & Gilbert, F. W. (2005). The role of brand personality in charitable giving: An assessment and validation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 33(3), 95-312.
32. Zinkhan, G. M. (2003). A look to the future of JAMS: Three years out, thirty years out. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(3), 225-228.