Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Benefits and challenges of conducting multiple methods research in marketing

  • Brief Report
  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using multiple methods to study a phenomenon is proposed to produce results that are more robust and compelling than single method studies. This research note investigates the implementation of multiple methods research in marketing. In the main study, we conducted a content analysis of articles published in five leading marketing journals from 1990 to 2008: Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, and Marketing Science. To aid in interpretation of findings from the content analysis, we gathered verbal data from authors of recent multiple methods studies to gain further insight into the benefits and challenges of conducting and publishing multiple methods research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

References

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 54, 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commuri, S., & Gentry, J. W. (2005). Resource allocation in households with women as chief wage earners. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(2), 185–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Mapping the field of mixed methods research. Journal of Multiple Methods Research, 3(2), 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. (1978). The logic of naturalistic inquiry. In N. K. Denzin (Ed.), Sociological methods: A sourcebook. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deshpande, R. (1983). Paradigms lost: On theory and method in research in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 47(3), 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, E. (1986). Humanistic inquiry in marketing research: Philosophy, method, and criteria. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(3), 237–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, L. A., & Ozanne, J. L. (1988). Alternative ways of seeking knowledge in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(1), 508–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • QSR International. (2008). NVivo, Version 8 (qualitative data analysis software). Melbourne, Australia: QSR International Pty Ltd.

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, D. W. (2007). New and improved! A look at the future. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stremersch, S., Verniers, I., & Verhoef, P. C. (2007). The quest for citations: Drivers of article impact. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 171–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svensson, G. (2006). The paradoxnoia of top journal(s) in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 40(11/12), 1153–1168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori, A. (2010). Are we there yet?: The state of the mixed methods community. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(4), 287–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combing qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Marketing Area, Rawls College of Business, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, 79409, USA

    Donna F. Davis

  2. Department of Management, College of Business, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Susan L. Golicic

  3. Department of Marketing and Sport Management, Earl N. Phillips School of Business, High Point University, High Point, NC, USA

    Courtney N. Boerstler

Authors
  1. Donna F. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susan L. Golicic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Courtney N. Boerstler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Donna F. Davis.

Additional information

The authors wish to acknowledge the research assistance provided on this project by Sunny Choi and Han Mo Oh who are PhD students at Texas Tech University.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Table 2 Multiple methods studies by research purpose
Full size table

Appendix 2

Table 3 Coding scheme
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Davis, D.F., Golicic, S.L. & Boerstler, C.N. Benefits and challenges of conducting multiple methods research in marketing. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 39, 467–479 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0204-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0204-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation