Special Issue on Measurement
der markt Special Issue on Measurement and Methodological Problems in Marketing Research; Deadline: October 2, 2006
|ARC: Community: ELMAR: Posting||Related ARContent: Marketing Scales|
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 18:07:32 +0100
From: Thomas Salzberger <Thomas.Salzberger@wu-wien.ac.at>
Call for Papers
der markt Special Issue on
‘Measurement and Methodological Problems in Marketing Research’
der markt – http://www.dermarkt.or.at
der markt is one of the leading scientific marketing journals in German-speaking Europe. Articles are published either in German or in English. The journal represents not only a platform for established methods, theories and approaches to research in marketing but is also open to alternative, unconventional and innovative thinking, methods and approaches. Papers have to adhere to academic rigour, hence the double-blind review is adopted. However, published manuscripts should also stimulate the transfer of scientific research to corporate practice.
About the special issue
der markt invites the submission of manuscripts that fit the theme ’Measurement and Methodological Problems in Marketing Research’. Thus, problems resulting from the measurement of latent constructs are of central interest. However, more general methodological issues are suitable as well.
Quantitative theories play an important role in research in marketing. Thus, sound measures are the backbone of a good deal of our empirical research. Churchill’s (1979) ‘Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs’ represents a milestone for construct operationalisation in marketing research. In the almost three decades since, the predominant paradigm has been further advanced. Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling have been enthusiastically embraced by empirical research in marketing. At the same time, Churchill’s paradigm has also met with criticism. Formative models of index construction have been suggested as an alternative to reflective scale development (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer 2001, Rossiter 2002, MacKenzie 2003, and Jarvis, MacKenzie and Podsakoff 2003). Noteworthy stimulation for the advancement of our measurement tools and theories is provided by item response theory (IRT). Singh (2004) contrasts a particular IRT-model with the conventional approach of measurement in marketing. Ewing, Salzberger and Sinkovics (2005) demonstrate the potential of the measurement theory underlying the Rasch model (Rasch 1980), which is a special class of models within IRT. Particularly with regard to the increase in comparability of measures across studies, the Rasch methodology offers promising possibilities. Unfolding models (e.g. Andrich 1996) are another approach that is underrepresented in marketing research. These models lend themselves to the analysis of data concerning attributes with ideal-points ruling out cumulative models.
Manuscripts are solicited on topics including:
- Conceptual contributions on the topic of measurement in marketing
- Issues of validity and the quality of measurement
- Empirical and theoretical comparisons of the construct operationalisation using reflective and formative indicators
- Innovative techniques of measurement in the empirical social sciences
- Applications of alternative measurement theories
- Problems resulting from repeated measurement in the context of longitudinal studies
Editor of the special issue
Dr Thomas Salzberger
Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration (WU Wien)
Institute of Marketing Management
Tel: +43-1-31336 4406
Fax: +43-1-31336 90 4406
Guidelines for submissions
- All papers will be subject to double-blind peer review
- Author guidelines for prospective contributors are available at: www.dermarkt.or.at
- Please submit the manuscript electronically by e-mail to Thomas.Salzberger@wu-wien.ac.at. The file should be in MS Word format. Figures are to be provided in MS Powerpoint format.
- Submission deadline: October 2, 2006
Andrich, D., 1996. A hyperbolic cosine latent trait model for unfolding polytomous responses: Reconciling Thurstone and Likert methodologies, in: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 49, 347-365.
Churchill, G. A., 1979. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, XVI (February), 64-73.
Diamantopoulos, A., and Winklhofer, H. M., 2001. Index Construction with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38 (May), 269-277.
Ewing, Michael, Salzberger, T., and Sinkovics, R. (2005): An Alternate Approach to Assessing Cross-Cultural Measurement Equivalence in Advertising Research, in: Journal of Advertising, Spring 2005, Vol 34 (1), 17-36.
Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., and Podsakoff, P. M., 2003. A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (September), 199-218.
MacKenzie, S. B., 2003. The Dangers of Poor Construct Conceptualization. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31 (3), 323 – 326.
Rasch, G., 1980. Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Chicago: MESA, Reprint of 1960, Danish Institute for Educational Research.
Rossiter, J., 2002. The C-OAR-SE Procedure for Scale Development in Marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19, 305–335.
Singh, J., 2004. Tackling measurement problems with Item Response Theory: Principles, characteristics,
and assessment, with an illustrative example, Journal of Business Research 57 (2), 184-208.