Laurel-Cook.com

in in cv cv
Designed and built by Laurel Aynne Cook © Laurel Aynne Cook 2024
Resources for Academics & Marketers

Journal Lists & Other Rankings

ACADEMIC JOURNAL GUIDE The Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS) has recently published the 2018 Academic Journal Guide. This information is usually published once every three years. After you register, you can log in and view the guide. For marketing, the top journals (i.e., those given the top score of 4* indicating they are Journals of Distinction) are as follows: Journal Marketing (JM), Journal of Consumer Research (JCR), Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS), Marketing Science (MS), and the Journal of Consumer Psychology (JCP). There are a total of 70 marketing journals listed (4 more since the last Academic Journal Guide published in 2015). CHARTEREDABS.ORG FINANCIAL TIMES The Financial Times conducted a review (a few years ago) of the journals that count towards its research rank. As a result, the number of journals considered went up to 50. Their list details the 50 journals used by the Financial Times in compiling the FT Research rank, included in the Global MBA, EMBA and Online MBA rankings. Marketing journals include the following: Journal of Consumer Psychology (#18), Journal of Consumer Research (#19), Journal of Marketing (#27), Journal of Marketing Research (#28), and the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (#31). FT.COM/50JOURNALS SCImago JOURNAL RANKS The SCImago Journal & Country Rank is a publicly available portal that includes the journals and country scientific indicators developed from the information contained in Elsevier. Citation data is drawn from over 21,500 titles from more than 5,000 international publishers and country performance metrics from 239 countries worldwide. This platform takes its name from the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator (PDF), developed by SCImago from the widely known algorithm Google PageRank. Data are available for download in Excel format. SCIMAGOJR.COM UT DALLAS The UT Dallas’ Naveen Jindal School of Management has created a database to track publications in 24 leading business journals. The database contains titles and author affiliations of papers published in these journals since 1990. The information in the database is used to provide the top 100 business school rankings since 1990 based on the total contributions of faculty. For marketing, tracking data includes the Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Marketing Science, and the Journal of Consumer Research. The most recent rankings were published March 14, 2018. JINDAL.UTDALLAS.EDU Some schools, like WVU, have a formal journal list available for faculty. In fact, WVU just revised our journal list for each business department (as of January 2018). If you’re interested in my collection of lists from a variety of institutions, please let me know.

Scales

MARKETING SCALES- 9 VOLUME SERIES One of my favorite go-to places for updated & reliable measures is Dr. Gordon C. Brunner’s Marketing Scales site. This resource has a list of new measures updated each week. Scales can be purchased separately or as full handbooks. The most recent version, V9, was published as a paperback in February 2017 ($99 on Amazon). The previous version, V8, is available for Kindle. Earlier versions (e.g., V7) are also available in electronic form (PDF). MARKETINGSCALES.COM MARKETING SCALES- SAGE PUBLICATION Another user-friendly collection of multi-item, self-report measures developed and frequently used in consumer behavior and marketing research is offered by Drs. William Bearden, Richard Netemeyer, and Kelly Haws: Bearden, William O., Richard G. Netemeyer, and Kelly L. Haws, eds. (2011), Handbook of Marketing Scales: Multi-Item Measures for Marketing and Consumer Behavior Research, 3d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. US.SAGEPUB.COM MANAGEMENT SCALES As of May 2020, there are 4,420 scales in the ‘Database of Management Scales and Measures’ website. This resource is created and managed by Dr. Jeff Miles (Professor of Management and Org Behavior in the Eberhardt School of Business. The site is searchable by variable name, last name, theory, first name, journal, volume, number, year, publisher, et cetera. ESBMANAGEMENT.PACIFIC.EDU SOCIAL DISTANCE Social distance, as a dimension of psychological distance (see Construal-Level theory; Trope & Liberman 2010), is a construct I’ve studied in each of my dissertation essays. In a seminal article on social exchange and how marketing messages are attributed, Houston and Gassenheimer (1987) introduce the concept of social distance and describe its role in relationship- building between a company and its consumers. The construct of social distance was originally introduced by Park (1924) as one’s desire for intimacy of an interaction. In much research during this time, social distance was measured with spatial distance and often correlated with predjudice likelihood (e.g., a person walks into a room and is asked to stand between two strangers- a man and a woman. Who does this person stand closer to?) Social distance’s multidimensional nature and connection with self-identity was highlighted when this construct was articulated as a continuum for perceived similarity (Brewer 1968; Rokeach 1960). Consistent with this view, I have conceptualized social distance as a consumer’s perception of similarity and closeness. My revised measure reflects the degree to which the consumer perceives his/herself as represented by the company. Social distance represents a motivational state that may vary in response to changes in marketing outputs (e.g., product labels, ads, celebrity endorsers). Below are my items for social distance. [In each of my studies, reliability ≥ .87, average variance extracted (AVE) is > .5, and the average factor loading > .7. Additionally, there were no cross loadings with other similar measures (e.g., social identity) and phi-squared is < AVE.]
After this image is shown to research participants, they are provided with the following: The image (shown above) is an illustration of various levels of distance between you and others. Distance is a perception of how close you feel and how much you identify with another entity (such as a person or company). “1” represents the smallest possible distance between you and someone else (e.g., a spouse, best friend, or someone you are close to). On the other hand, a “7” represents the largest possible distance between you and someone else (e.g., a complete stranger or someone you are not close to). As a follow-up, they’re asked the following: Think of a person you feel closest to. Examples include the following: a spouse, a girlfriend, a boyfriend, a best friend, or a parent. What is the level of distance you have with this person? (1-7 scale) Think of a person you do not closest to. Examples include the following: a stranger, a co-worker, a distance relative, a store employee, etc. What is the level of distance you have with this person? What is the level of distance you have with the (company name here), given the information shown earlier in the survey? What is the level of distance you have with similar companies who do not use (marketing strategy here)?

Explore some of the things I’ve found helpful in my career as a researcher

CONFERENCES & MEMBERSHIPS CREATIVE CROWDSOURCING DATA STATISTICS & THEORIES DATA SOURCES DESIGN & GRANTS SCALES SMALL BUSINESS HELP JOURNAL LISTS Top of Page
Designed and built by Laurel Aynne Cook © Laurel Aynne Cook 2024 Top of Page
Resources: Scales SCALES
MARKETING SCALES- 9 VOLUME SERIES One of my favorite go-to places for updated & reliable measures is Dr. Gordon C. Brunner’s Marketing Scales site. This resource has a list of new measures updated each week. Scales can be purchased separately or as full handbooks. Earlier versions (e.g., V7) are also available in electronic form (PDF). MARKETINGSCALES.COM MARKETING SCALES- SAGE PUBLICATION Another user-friendly collection of multi- item, self-report measures developed and frequently used in consumer behavior and marketing research: Bearden, William O., Richard G. Netemeyer, and Kelly L. Haws, eds. (2011), Handbook of Marketing Scales: Multi-Item Measures for Marketing and Consumer Behavior Research, 3d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. US.SAGEPUB.COM MANAGEMENT SCALES As of May 2020, there are 4,420 scales in the ‘Database of Management Scales and Measures’ website. The site is searchable by variable name, last name, theory, first name, journal, volume, number, year, publisher, et cetera. ESBMANAGEMENT.PACIFIC.EDU SOCIAL DISTANCE Social distance, as a dimension of psychological distance (see Construal-Level theory; Trope & Liberman 2010), is a construct I’ve studied in each of my dissertation essays. In a seminal article on social exchange and how marketing messages are attributed, Houston and Gassenheimer (1987) introduce the concept of social distance and describe its role in relationship-building between a company and its consumers. The construct of social distance was originally introduced by Park (1924) as one’s desire for intimacy of an interaction. In much research during this time, social distance was measured with spatial distance and often correlated with predjudice likelihood (e.g., a person walks into a room and is asked to stand between two strangers- a man and a woman. Who does this person stand closer to?) Social distance’s multidimensional nature and connection with self-identity was highlighted when this construct was articulated as a continuum for perceived similarity (Brewer 1968; Rokeach 1960). Consistent with this view, I have conceptualized social distance as a consumer’s perception of similarity and closeness. My revised measure reflects the degree to which the consumer perceives his/herself as represented by the company. Social distance represents a motivational state that may vary in response to changes in marketing outputs (e.g., product labels, ads, celebrity endorsers). In each of my studies, reliability ≥ .87, average variance extracted (AVE) is > .5, and the average factor loading > .7. Additionally, there were no cross loadings with other similar measures (e.g., social identity) and phi-squared is < AVE.