The AMS Review

Abstract

Welcome to the inaugural issue of the AMS Review! As setforth by the Academy of Marketing Science and noted onthe journal’s website (http://amsr.edmgr.com), the aim andscope of the Review is to:…publishthoughtfulcontributionsthatofferinsightsandperspectives extending knowledge and understanding ofmarketing-related phenomena. The Review is receptiveto different philosophical perspectives and levels ofanalysis that range from micro to macro. Especiallywelcome are manuscripts that integrate research andtheory from non-marketing disciplines such as manage-ment, sociology, economics, psychology, geography,anthropology, or other behavioral sciences. Examples ofsuitable manuscripts include those incorporating con-ceptual and organizing frameworks or models; thoseextending, comparing, or critically evaluating existingtheories or models; and those suggesting new orinnovative theories or models. Comprehensive andintegrative quantitative syntheses of research literatures(i.e., meta-analyses) are appropriate.As such, the AMS Review possesses goals similar to TheAcademy of Management Review and Psychological Reviewand, like these scholarly publications, does not publishempirically based research.The genesis of the Review was the recognition by theAcademy of Marketing Science leadership several yearsago that the marketing discipline was being underserved byexisting journals when it came to contributions that focusedon comprehensive and evaluative literature reviews, con-ceptual models, and theory creation and development.Consequently, the Academy created the AMS Review toproactively address this lacuna.The concern over the lack of conceptual and theoreticaladvancements has been corroborated by a recent Journal ofMarketing article by Yadav (2010). In the article, Yadavprovided a detailed examination of publishing trends inmarketing’s major journals. Based on his analysis, therewere only 818 “conceptual” articles—articles not reportingempirical research—out of a total of 5,520 articlespublished in Journal of Marketing, Journal of MarketingResearch, Journal of Consumer Research, MarketingScience, and Journal of the Academy of Marketing Scienceover a 30 year period from 1978 to 2007. Unfortunately,even with this low ratio of conceptual to empirical articles,the data revealed a declining trend in the publication ofconceptual articles beginning in 1993.Interestingly, the lack of conceptual and theoreticaladvancements might lie in part with the training of doctoralstudents in marketing. Yadav offered informal, anecdotalevidence to suggest that doctoral training in marketingincreasingly emphasizes statistical techniques and empiricalresearch to the detriment of conceptual and theoreticalresearch. This evidence led to a review of doctoral programcourse offerings by the co-editors.Doctoral trainingThe American Marketing Association hosts a websitelisting doctoral programs that allow students to specializein marketing. As of the fall of 2010, there were 184 suchdoctoral programs on the list categorized by geographiclocation: