Writing and publishing important scientific articles: A reviewer's perspective

The article discusses various complex and interrelated quality issues mediating reviewers' expectations and standards. Authors must meet or exceed reviewers' and editors' expectations of providing convincing arguments and support of the importance and relevancy of the research topic and questions, evidence of scientific rigorousness, and meaningful and usefulness of the findings making substantial and/or incremental contributions to the scientific body of marketing knowledge. Marketing scholars struggling to publish their research in high-quality marketing journals will definitely benefit from the insights in this article.Scientific article Writing and publishing insights Journal quality image Review process Important-relevant contributions

Prospective respondent integrity behavior in replying to direct mail questionnaires: a contributor in overestimating nonresponse rates.

The research questions of this study were to what extent are deliverable mail questionnaires addressed to the wrong prospective respondent returned unopened to the researcher vs. completed by someone other than the persons they were mailed to? Thus, the purpose was to investigate the existence of a prospective respondent integrity behavior factor among people who received incorrectly named, yet deliverable, questionnaires and the impact of this behavior on estimating nonresponse rates, nonresponse bias, and administrative sampling error as well as on the generalizability of results to the original defined target population. Since only approximately 41% of such questionnaires are returned to the researcher, reported response rates of mail surveys will be incorrect if this particular integrity behavior factor is not considered. Since only 0.5% of such questionnaires are completed and returned, incorrect deliverable questionnaires are not a significant contributor in limiting the researcher\u27s ability to assess response type errors

Prospective respondent integrity behavior in replying to direct mail questionnaires: a contributor in overestimating nonresponse rates.

The research questions of this study were to what extent are deliverable mail questionnaires addressed to the wrong prospective respondent returned unopened to the researcher vs. completed by someone other than the persons they were mailed to? Thus, the purpose was to investigate the existence of a prospective respondent integrity behavior factor among people who received incorrectly named, yet deliverable, questionnaires and the impact of this behavior on estimating nonresponse rates, nonresponse bias, and administrative sampling error as well as on the generalizability of results to the original defined target population. Since only approximately 41% of such questionnaires are returned to the researcher, reported response rates of mail surveys will be incorrect if this particular integrity behavior factor is not considered. Since only 0.5% of such questionnaires are completed and returned, incorrect deliverable questionnaires are not a significant contributor in limiting the researcher\u27s ability to assess response type errors

Categorizing cognitive responses: An empirical investigation of the cognitive intent congruency between independent raters and original subject raters.

Cognitive response coding is relevant for researchers who collect cognitive responses from individuals in the form of answers to open-ended questions or as thoughts produced while exposed to advertising messages. Coding of these cognitive responses is normally completed by a panel of two to four independent judges. This article is the first to empirically investigate cognitive intent congruence aspects underlining the data generated through cognitive response coding. The results show that there are definite gaps in the congruence of cognitive intent between the cognitive coding results that respondents, serving as cognitive response coders of their own thoughts, can provide and those cognitive response patterns provided by independent raters. The current study\u27s results raise a yellow caution flag regarding external independent raters\u27 ability to produce valid cognitive intent coding patterns that cannot be ignored by future researchers. The authors offer interpretation, implications, limitations, and directions for future research

Categorizing cognitive responses: An empirical investigation of the cognitive intent congruency between independent raters and original subject raters.

Cognitive response coding is relevant for researchers who collect cognitive responses from individuals in the form of answers to open-ended questions or as thoughts produced while exposed to advertising messages. Coding of these cognitive responses is normally completed by a panel of two to four independent judges. This article is the first to empirically investigate cognitive intent congruence aspects underlining the data generated through cognitive response coding. The results show that there are definite gaps in the congruence of cognitive intent between the cognitive coding results that respondents, serving as cognitive response coders of their own thoughts, can provide and those cognitive response patterns provided by independent raters. The current study\u27s results raise a yellow caution flag regarding external independent raters\u27 ability to produce valid cognitive intent coding patterns that cannot be ignored by future researchers. The authors offer interpretation, implications, limitations, and directions for future research

Retailing evolution research: Introduction to the special section on retailing research

Five articles were selected from studies presented at the Ninth Society for Marketing Advances Retailing Research Symposium. The following article introduces their themes and main findings, along with the process of selection.Retailing Research Marketing Business research