The other "meta" of meta-analysis: Qualitative and text-based approaches to "analysis of analyses" in marketing

Titolo Rivista: MERCATI & COMPETITIVITÀ
Autori/Curatori: Ksenia Silchenko
Anno di pubblicazione: 2018 Fascicolo: 4 Lingua: English
Numero pagine: 19 P. 27-45 Dimensione file: 480 KB
DOI: 10.3280/MC2018-004003
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit.
Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

In the exponential growth of scientific publication output and the growing maturity of the marketing discipline, doing literature and research reviews has become more than just a research convention, but rather a proper form of research. However, despite increasing attention and the number of published guides and handbooks, review methodologies tend to evolve in the direction of statistical meta-analyses, thus not only neglecting the knowledge-advancing potential of qualitative work, but also contributing to the widening of the qualitative-quantitative divide. By bringing attention to qualitative review methodologies and introducing a categorization of "meta" approaches informed by the insights from the sociology of knowledge, this critical review paper suggests that a stronger focus on text-based methods applied to the analysis of (marketing) literature can enrich (marketing) research, both in terms of methodologies and new knowledge generation.

  1. Andriopoulos C., & Slater S. (2013). Exploring the landscape of qualitative research in international marketing. International Marketing Review, 30(4): 384-412. DOI: 10.1108/IMR-03-2012-0061
  2. Barnett-Page E., & Thomas J. (2009). Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9(1): 59. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-9-59
  3. Berger P.L., & Luckmann T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. London: Penguin Books.
  4. Borman G.D., & Grigg J.A. (2009). Visual and narrative interpretation. In: Cooper H.M., Hedges L.V., & Valentine J. C. (Eds.). The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis (pp. 497-519). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  5. Bornmann L., & Mutz R. (2015). Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(11): 2215-2222.
  6. Brannan M.J., Fleetwood S., O’Mahoney J., & Vincent S. (2017). Critical Essay: Meta-analysis: A critical realist critique and alternative. Human Relations, 70(1): 11-39. DOI: 10.1177/0018726716674063
  7. Brown S. (1999). Marketing and literature: The anxiety of academic influence. Journal of Marketing, 63(1): 1-15. DOI: 10.2307/1251997
  8. Brown S., & Schau H.J. (2008). Writing Russell Belk: Excess all areas. Marketing Theory, 8(2): 143-165. DOI: 10.1177/1470593108089202.
  9. Brownlie D., & Saren M. (1997). Beyond the one-dimensional marketing manager: The discourse of theory, practice and relevance. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 14(2): 147-161. DOI: 10.1016/S0167-8116(96)00036-5
  10. Collins H.M. (1983). The sociology of scientific knowledge: Studies of contemporary science. Annual Review of Sociology, 9(1): 265-285.
  11. Cooper H.M. (1988). Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowledge in Society, 1(1): 104-126. DOI: 10.1007/BF03177550
  12. Cooper H.M., & Hedges L.V. (2009). Research synthesis as a scientific process. In: Cooper H.M., Hedges L.V., & Valentine J. C. (Eds.). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd., pp. 3-16). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  13. Cooper H.M., Hedges L.V., & Valentine J.C. (Eds.) (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  14. Davis M.S. (1971). That’s interesting!: Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1(2): 309-344. DOI: 10.1177/004839317100100211
  15. Denyer D., & Tranfield D. (2006). Using qualitative research synthesis to build an actionable knowledge base. Management Decision, 44(2): 213-227. DOI: 10.1108/00251740610650201
  16. Dixon-Woods M., Cavers D., Agarwal S., Annandale E., Arthur A., Harvey J., Sutton A. J. (2006). Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6(1): 35. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-35
  17. Eisend M. (2015). Have we progressed marketing knowledge? A meta-meta-analysis of effect sizes in marketing research. Journal of Marketing, 79(3): 23-40.
  18. Eteokleous P.P., Leonidou L.C., & Katsikeas C. S. (2016). Corporate social responsibility in international marketing: Review, assessment, and future research. International Marketing Review, 33(4): 580-624. DOI: 10.1108/IMR-04-2014-0120
  19. Fairclough N. (2003). Analysing discourse. London: Routledge.
  20. Fairclough N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
  21. Fischer E., & Otnes C.C. (2006). Breaking new ground: Developing grounded theories in marketing and consumer behavior. In: Belk R.W. (Ed.). Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Marketing (pp. 19-30). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: 10.4337/9781847204127.00008
  22. Foucault M. (1972). The Archeology of Knowledge. New York: Pantheon Books.
  23. Foucault M. (2001). Truth and power. In: Faubion J.D. (Ed.). Power: Essential works of Michel Foucault 1954-1984. Volume three. (pp. 111-153). New York: New Press.
  24. Galvagno M. (2017). Bibliometric literature review: An opportunity for marketing scholars. Mercati & Competitività, 4: 7-15. DOI: 10.3280/MC2017-004001
  25. Galvagno M., & Dalli D. (2014). Theory of value co-creation: A systematic literature review. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 24(6): 643-683. DOI: 10.1108/MSQ-09-2013-0187
  26. Glaser B.G., & Strauss A. L. (2009). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New Brunswik: Transaction Publishers.
  27. Hackley C. (2001). Looking at me, looking at you: Qualitative research and the politics of knowledge representations in advertising and academia. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 4(1): 42-51. DOI: 10.1108/13522750110364569.
  28. Hackley C. (2003). “we are all customers now...” Rhetorical strategy and ideological control in marketing management texts. Journal of Management Studies, 40(5): 1325-1352. DOI: 10.1111/1467-6486.00382
  29. Hanson D., & Grimmer M. (2007). The mix of qualitative and quantitative research in major marketing journals, 1993-2002. European Journal of Marketing, 41(1/2): 58-70. DOI: 10.1108/03090560710718111
  30. Hirschman E.C. (1993). Ideology in consumer research, 1980 and 1990: A Marxist and Feminist critique. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(4): 537-555. DOI: 10.1086/209321
  31. Hoffman, D.L., & Holbrook, M.B. (1993). The intellectual structure of consumer research: A bibliometric study of author cocitations in the first 15 years of the journal of consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(4): 505-517. DOI: 10.1086/20931
  32. Hughner R.S., McDonagh P., Prothero A., Shultz C.J., & Stanton J. (2007). Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 6(2-3): 94-110.
  33. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (2017). “Call for papers for a special issue and thought leaders’ conference on generalizations in marketing: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Edited by Mark B. Houston and John Hulland”. — Available at: http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/JAMS+Generalizations+in+Marketing+CFP+Final.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1612857-p173668805.
  34. Kilbourne W.E., & Beckmann S. C. (1998). Review and critical assessment of research on marketing and the environment. Journal of Marketing Management, 14(6): 513-532. DOI: 10.1362/026725798784867716
  35. Krippendorff K. (1989). Content analysis. In: Barnouw E., Gerbner G., Schramm W., Worth T.L., & Gross L. (Eds.). International encyclopedia of communication (pp. 403-407). New York: Oxford University Press.
  36. Lacity M.C., & Janson M.A. (1994). Understanding qualitative data: A framework of text analysis methods. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(2): 137-155. DOI: 10.1080/07421222.1994.11518043
  37. Larsen P.O., & von Ins M. (2010). The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, 84(3): 575-603.
  38. Leonidou L. C., & Katsikeas C. S. (2010). Integrative assessment of exporting research articles in business journals during the period 1960-2007. Journal of Business Research, 63(8): 879-887.
  39. Littell J.H., Corcoran J., & Pillai V. (2008). Systematic reviews and meta-analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
  40. Marx W., & Bornmann L. (2016). Change of perspective: Bibliometrics from the point of view of cited references – a literature overview on approaches to the evaluation of cited references in bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 109(2): 1397-1415.
  41. McCarthy E.D. (1996). Knowledge as culture: The new sociology of knowledge. London: Routledge.
  42. McDonagh P., & Prothero A. (2014). Sustainability marketing research: Past, present and future. Journal of Marketing Management, 30(11-12): 1186-1219. DOI: 10.1080/0267257X.2014.943263
  43. Mulkay M. (1979). Science and the sociology of knowledge. London and New York: Routledge. Murray J.B., & Ozanne J.L. (2006). Rethinking the critical imagination. In: Belk R.W. (Ed.). Handbook of qualitative research methods in marketing (pp. 46-55). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: 10.4337/9781847204127.00010
  44. Noblit G.W., & Hare R.D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies (Vol. 11). Newbury Park: SAGE Publications.
  45. Ogawa R. T., & Malen B. (1991). Towards rigor in reviews of multivocal literatures: Applying the exploratory case study method. Review of Educational Research, 61(3): 265-286. DOI: 10.3102/00346543061003265
  46. Orsingher C. (2016). Synthesizing research in marketing through meta-analysis. Mercati & Competitività, 2: 7-10. DOI: 10.3280/MC2016-002001
  47. Paterson B.L., Thorne S.E., Canam C., & Jillings C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative health research: A practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
  48. Pawson R. (2002). Evidence-based policy: The promise of `realist synthesis’. Evaluation, 8(3): 340-358. DOI: 10.1177/135638902401462448
  49. Point S., Fendt J., & Jonsen K. (2017). Qualitative inquiry in management: Methodological dilemmas and concerns in meta-analysis. European Management Review, 14(2): 185-204.
  50. Sandelowski M., Docherty S., & Emden C. (1997). Qualitative metasynthesis: Issues and techniques. Research in Nursing & Health, 20(4): 365-371.
  51. Skålén P., Fougère M., & Fellesson M. (2008). Marketing discourse: A critical perspective. London: Routledge.
  52. Stern B.B. (1990). Literary criticism and the history of marketing thought: A new perspective on “reading” marketing theory. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(4): 329-336. DOI: 10.1007/BF02723918
  53. Suchman M.C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3): 571-610. DOI: 10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080331
  54. Suri H. (2011). Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis. Qualitative Research Journal, 11(2): 63-75. DOI: 10.3316/QRJ1102063
  55. Suri H., & Clarke D. (2009). Advancements in research synthesis methods: From a methodologically inclusive perspective. Review of Educational Research, 79(1): 395-430. DOI: 10.3102/0034654308326349
  56. Thomas J., & Harden A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1): 45. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
  57. Thompson C.J. (1993). Modern truth and postmodern incredulity: A hermeneutic deconstruction of the metanarrative of “scientific truth” in marketing research. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 10(3): 325-338. DOI: 10.1016/0167-8116(93)90014-P
  58. Tranfield D., Denyer D., & Smart P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3): 207-222. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8551.00375
  59. Weed M. (2008). A potential method for the interpretive synthesis of qualitative research: Issues in the development of “meta-interpretation”. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(1): 13-28. DOI: 10.1080/13645570701401222

Ksenia Silchenko, The other "meta" of meta-analysis: Qualitative and text-based approaches to "analysis of analyses" in marketing in "MERCATI & COMPETITIVITÀ" 4/2018, pp 27-45, DOI: 10.3280/MC2018-004003