journal of marketing research review process

• Join the AMA
• Find learning by topic
• Free learning resources for members
• Credentialed Learning
• Training for teams
• Why learn with the AMA?
• Marketing News
• Academic Journals
• Guides & eBooks
• Marketing Job Board
• Academic Job Board
• AMA Foundation
• Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
• Collegiate Resources
• Awards and Scholarships
• Sponsorship Opportunities
• Strategic Partnerships

We noticed that you are using Internet Explorer 11 or older that is not support any longer. Please consider using an alternative such as Microsoft Edge, Chrome, or Firefox.

Happening This Week: AMA's FREE Digital Marketing Virtual Conference Register Now | Log In

AMA Academic Journals publish the latest peer-reviewed research aimed at advancing our industry and equipping business professionals with the insight needed to make better managerial decisions. Digital access to all five of our journals is an included benefit that comes with being an AMA member.

Follow the AMA Journals on LinkedIn:

• Journal of Marketing
• Journal of Marketing Research
• Journal of Public Policy & Marketing
• Journal of International Marketing
• Journal of Interactive Marketing

Journal of Marketing ( JM ) develops and disseminates knowledge about real-world marketing questions useful to scholars, educators, managers, policy makers, consumers, and other societal stakeholders around the world. It is the premier outlet for substantive marketing scholarship. Since its founding in 1936, JM has played a significant role in shaping the content and boundaries of the marketing discipline. Learn more about JM here .

Impact factor: 11.5

What's new.

Scholarly Insight

What Do IKEA, Lego, and Apple Have in Common? All Appeal to Customers by Revealing the Inner Workings of Products

A Journal of Marketing study shows that displaying the inner workings of a product is a cost-effective way to boost consumer confidence and increase perceptions of product worth.

Can the On-Demand Model Work for Online Educational Platforms Like Coursera?

A new Journal of Marketing study suggests that an on-demand model for online learning may bring in more paying users, but those users could also be less engaged in the material 🎧

special issue

• Marketing in the Health Care Sector

This Journal of Marketing special issue addresses the complexities arising from disruption in the health care industry while paving the way for further research into how marketing can empower choice, foster competition, and improve health outcomes.

For Authors

Editorial Leadership

• Associate Editors
• Developmental Editors
• ​Editorial Review Board
• ​Advisory Board
• Meet  JM  at a Conference
• JM Editorial Cornerstones

Submit a Paper

• ​ Submission Guidelines
• Editorial Mission ​
• Submit a Manuscript
• What to Focus on When Submitting to JM

Editorial Policies

• AMA Journal Policies
• Journal of Marketing Policy for Research Transparency
• Appeal Policy

Marketing Insights from AMA Fellows

The Past, Present, and Future of Marketing [Philip Kotler’s Insights]

Phil Kotler, the “father of modern marketing,” reflects on the past and future of the discipline.

Journal of Marketing Research-Driven Apps

Research-Driven App

Writing Clarity Calculator

This tool can help scholars recognize and repair unclear writing so their research can make a larger impact.

Market Structure Map

This tool provides an interactive visualization of market structure among brands.

Syntactic Surprise Calculator

This tool measures the unexpectedness of syntax to improve marketing communications.

Do No Harm? Unintended Consequences Of Pharmaceutical Price Regulation In India

This web companion extends the research paper, “Do No Harm? Unintended Consequences of Pharmaceutical Price Regulation in India” by providing detailed context and results.

Additional Resources

For marketers.

• Scholarly Insights
• The JM Buzz Podcast
• Webinars for Managers
• JM Press Releases

For Scholars

• IJRM – JM Reviewer Workshop at EMAC 2023
• Webinars for Scholars
• Insights for the Classroom
• Challenging the Boundaries of Marketing
• Videos: What Academics Can Learn from Practitioners
• Resources for Reviewers

Special Issues

• Better Marketing for a Better World
• New Technologies in Marketing
• JM -MSI Special Issue

Explore the Journal

• Current JM Issue
• Articles in Advance
• Recently Accepted Manuscripts
• Get Article Alerts
• Meet JM at a Conference
• Follow JM on LinkedIn

DEI Commitment

Journal of Marketing  is committed to a diverse, inclusive, and welcoming publishing environment that includes editorial teams and scholars of all races, genders, sexual orientations, and religious affiliations around the world.  JM ‘s  marketplace of ideas  thrives when diverse people and perspectives come together to tackle important marketing questions and problems facing our world.

Journal of Marketing Research ( JMR ) delves into the latest thinking in marketing research concepts, methods, and applications from a broad range of scholars. It is included in both the  Financial Times  top 50 business journals and the University of Texas at Dallas research rankings journal list. Learn more about JMR here .

Impact factor: 5.1 Scimago journal ranking: 6.321

Recommended reading.

How Brand Differentiation Shapes Corporate Culture and Profits

A Journal of Marketing Research study shows that vertical brand differentiation is associated with lower employee pay, whereas horizontal brand differentiation is associated with higher pay.

Steady Rides, Steady Profits: Detecting Customer Routines to Optimize CRM Strategies

This Journal of Marketing Research study finds customers with routines exhibit heightened future usage and engagement rates, lower price sensitivity, and greater resilience to service disruptions.

• Mitigation in Marketing

This JMR special issue advocates for a mitigation-based approach to marketing scholarship, with a key goal of developing strategies to reduce the potentially deleterious outcomes of marketing.

• Editorial Review Board
• Advisory Board
• Submission Guidelines
• Submission Site
• JMR Editorial Statement

• Journal of Marketing Research Policy for Research Transparency
• Decision Appeal Policy

IMPACT AT JMR

Proven and New Survey Techniques to Obtain Sensitive Information from Consumers

This guide summarizes academic research to help analysts get more truthful and accurate survey responses on sensitive topics.

Research Insights

• Scholarly Insights by AMA DocSIG
• IMPACT at JMR
• Education and Marketing
• Marketing Insights from Multimedia Data
• 2023 Paul E. Green Award
• 2024 Weitz-Winer-O’Dell Awar d
• Current JMR Issue
• Get JMR Article Alerts
• Follow JMR on LinkedIn
• Subscribe to the JMR Updates Newsletter

Journal of Public Policy & Marketing ( JPP&M ) is a forum for understanding the nexus of marketing and public policy, with each issue featuring a wide-range of topics, including, but not limited to, ecology, ethics and social responsibility, nutrition and health, regulation and deregulation, security and privacy. Learn more about JPP&M here .

Impact factor: 5.1

Special Issue

Transformative Consumer Research (TCR) is a movement that seeks to encourage, support, and publicize research that benefits consumer welfare and quality of life for all beings affected by consumption across the world. In this JPP&M Special Issue, marketing scholars discuss an agenda to accelerate the success of impactful academic research in this space.

Marketing to Prevent Radicalization: Developing Insights for Policies

JPP&M special issue editors Marie Louise Radanielina and Yany Grégoire set out to add marketing voices to the conversation about radicalization. Check out the research here.

Research Curation

JPP&M Articles Addressing Race, Diversity, and Inclusion

JPP&M chronicles and analyzes the joint impact of marketing and governmental actions on economic performance, consumer welfare, and business decisions. This page catalogs  JPP&M ‘s contributions on the topic of race and its intersection with marketing and public policy.

• JPP&M  Trainee Reviewer Program

• Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews in Marketing and Public Policy

Check out the research in the January 2024  Journal of Public Policy & Marketing  special issue, “Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews in Marketing and Public Policy.”

Research Curations

• A Call for Further Research at the Intersection of Race, Marketing, and Public Policy
• What Exactly Is Marketing and Public Policy?
• A Curation on Pharmaceutical Marketing and Agenda for Future Research

JPP&M Videos

• JPP&M  10–20 Minute Video Modules
• A Conversation About Media Impact with Jessica Vredenburg
• Maura Scott Featured in  Financial Times  Panel on Societal Impact in Business Research
• Marketing to Prevent Radicalization
• Pharmaceuticals, Marketing, and Society
• The COVID-19 Pandemic through the Lens of Marketing and Public Policy
• Current JPP&M Issue
• Thomas C. Kinnear Award Collection
• Get JPP&M Article Alerts
• Follow JPP&M on LinkedIn

Journal of International Marketing ( JIM ) is dedicated to advancing international marketing practice, research and theory. This journal’s prime objective is to bridge the gap between theory and practice in international marketing for business scholars and practitioners. Learn more about JIM here .

Impact factor: 4.9

research insight

Becoming TikTok Famous: How Global Brands Engage Emerging-Market Consumers

How can managers of global brands increase likes, shares, and comments on TikTok? A Journal of International Marketing study explores.

Research Insight

Optimizing Global Branding by Combining Local and Foreign Elements

A Journal of International Marketing study shows that building a brand image with balanced local and foreign branding elements leads to more favorable brand and product evaluations compared to either local or foreign appeals alone.

• Brands and Branding in an International Context

This Journal of International Marketing Special Issue takes a fresh look at brands and branding in an international context, exploring several forward-thinking branding topics and perspectives.

• Editor in Chief

Call for Papers

• Global Luxury Branding
• Marketing’s Role in the Management of Fast-Evolving Global Supply Chains
• Digital Platforms and Ecosystems in International Marketing

Centre for the Understanding of Sustainable Prosperity

Performance in the Workplace: What’s Dance Got to Do With It?

In a first-of-its-kind study, Journal of International Marketing researchers find that promoting dance more widely as a recreational/physical activity for all ages may have beneficial effects not only for individuals but also for the organizations they work for. 

• Theory and Practice in Global Marketing (TPGM)
• Customer Engagement in International Markets
• Well-Being in a Global World, Part 1: Lessons from a Global Pandemic
• Well-Being in a Global World, Part 2: Future Directions for Research in International Marketing
• 2023 S. Tamer Cavusgil Award
• 2024 Hans B. Thorelli Award
• Current JIM Issue
• Get JIM Article Alerts
• Follow JIM on LinkedIn

Journal of Interactive Marketing aims to identify issues and frame ideas associated with the rapidly expanding field of interactive marketing, which includes both online and offline topics related to the analysis, targeting, and service of individual customers. We strive to publish leading-edge, high-quality, and original research that presents results, methodologies, theories, concepts, models, and applications on any aspect of interactive marketing. Learn more about the journal here .

Impact factor: 6.8

Getting the Recipe Right: How Different Content Combinations Drive Social Media Engagement

In a Journal of Interactive Marketing study, researchers analyze engagement behaviors across 516 Instagram stories and identify distinct social media content “recipes” that drive successful engagement. They identify four specific combinations for engagement: “loud,” “informative,” “affective,” and “relational.”

Should You Feed the Trolls? How Toxic Social Media Comments Can Increase Product Usage

This Journal of Interactive Marketing study explores the types of content that attract toxic comments, and it finds that toxic comments aren’t always a bad thing.

• Information Technologies and Consumers’ Well-Being

Check out the research from the latest Journal of Interactive Marketing special issue.

• Editors and Editors Emeritus

• Aims and Scope

Calls for Papers

• Intelligent Automation and Artificial Intelligence in Marketing
• Advancing Interactive Marketing Through Cross-Disciplinary Approaches

• Editorial Policies & Procedures
• Journal Indexing and Metrics

Award-Winning Research

Montaguti, Valentini, and Vecchioni Win 2023 Journal of Interactive Marketing Best Paper Award

The winners of the 2023 Best Paper Award are Elisa Montaguti, Sara Valentini, and Federica Vecchioni. Click here to learn more about the winning article and view the finalists.

• Current Issue
• Examining the Unanticipated Consequences of Interactive Marketing
• Big Data, Technology-Driven CRM & Artificial Intelligence
• Mobile Marketing
• Get Journal of Interactive Marketing Article Alerts
• Follow Journal of Interactive Marketing on LinkedIn

By continuing to use this site, you accept the use of cookies, pixels and other technology that allows us to understand our users better and offer you tailored content. You can learn more about our privacy policy here

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Journal of Marketing Research

Preview this book.

• Description
• Aims and Scope
• Editorial Board
• Abstracting / Indexing
• Submission Guidelines

Mission The Journal of Marketing Research ( JMR ) is a bimonthly journal serving the scholarly and practitioner communities in the field of marketing.

Editorial Objectives JMR is a broad-based journal that aims to publish the highest-quality articles in the discipline of marketing. Published articles must make a significant contribution to the marketing discipline, provide a basis for stimulating additional research, and meet high standards of scholarship.

Nature of JMR Research JMR publishes articles representing the entire spectrum of topics in marketing. It welcomes diverse theoretical perspectives, and a wide variety of data and methodological approaches. JMR seeks papers that make methodological, substantive, and/or theoretical contributions. Empirical studies in papers that seek to make a theoretical and/or substantive contribution may involve experimental and/or observational designs and rely on primary data (including qualitative data) and/or secondary data (including meta-analytic data sets).

Methodological Contribution

Authors seeking to make a methodological contribution should compare their proposed new methods to established methods, indicating the circumstances under which the new methods are superior and why. The papers should also disclose limitations of the new methods. The papers should explain what the proposed methods might mean for understanding consumers, firms, or regulatory agencies. Papers that review methods to stimulate further research are also welcome.

Substantive Contribution

Authors seeking to make a substantive contribution should provide insights into marketing phenomena, and discuss their implications for practitioners, policy makers, and customers, among other stakeholders. Research in other disciplines such as economics, management, operations, or psychology may be used to generate insights into marketing phenomena. Papers that use analytical economic models should provide substantive insights into important marketing problems.

Theoretical Contribution

Authors seeking to make a theoretical contribution should build new theory in the field of marketing, and discuss its implications for practitioners, policy makers, customers and/or other stakeholders. Authors should highlight their theoretical contribution by briefly reviewing extant research and explaining how their work advances this research. To the extent they are relevant, authors should describe implications of their new theories for other disciplines.

Click here to subscribe to the American Marketing Association Bundle, where you can gain access to all SAGE published AMA content! Learn more about JMR at AMA.org .

JMR is a broad-based journal that aims to publish the highest-quality articles in the discipline of marketing. Published articles must make a significant contribution to the marketing discipline, provide a basis for stimulating additional research, and meet high standards of scholarship.

• Business Periodicals Index
• Clarivate Analytics: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)
• Current Index to Statistics
• EBSCO: Business Source Alumni Edition
• EBSCO: Business Source Complete
• EBSCO: Business Source Elite
• EBSCO: Business Source Premier
• EBSCO: Communication & Mass Media Complete

Manuscript submission guidelines can be accessed on Sage Journals .

• Read Online
• Sample Issues
• Current Issue
• Email Alert
• Permissions
• Foreign rights
• Reprints and sponsorship
• Advertising

Individual Subscription, E-access

Individual Subscription, Print Only

Individual Subscription, Combined (Print & E-access)

Institutional Subscription, E-access

Institutional Subscription & Backfile Lease, E-access Plus Backfile (All Online Content)

Institutional Subscription, Print Only

Institutional Subscription, Combined (Print & E-access)

Institutional Subscription & Backfile Lease, Combined Plus Backfile (Current Volume Print & All Online Content)

Institutional Backfile Purchase, E-access (Content through 1998)

Individual, Single Print Issue

Institutional, Single Print Issue

To order single issues of this journal, please contact SAGE Customer Services at 1-800-818-7243 / 1-805-583-9774 with details of the volume and issue you would like to purchase.

Review articles: purpose, process, and structure

• Published: 02 October 2017
• Volume 46 , pages 1–5, ( 2018 )

Cite this article

• Robert W. Palmatier 1 ,
• Mark B. Houston 2 &
• John Hulland 3  

246k Accesses

506 Citations

64 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Many research disciplines feature high-impact journals that are dedicated outlets for review papers (or review–conceptual combinations) (e.g., Academy of Management Review , Psychology Bulletin , Medicinal Research Reviews ). The rationale for such outlets is the premise that research integration and synthesis provides an important, and possibly even a required, step in the scientific process. Review papers tend to include both quantitative (i.e., meta-analytic, systematic reviews) and narrative or more qualitative components; together, they provide platforms for new conceptual frameworks, reveal inconsistencies in the extant body of research, synthesize diverse results, and generally give other scholars a “state-of-the-art” snapshot of a domain, often written by topic experts (Bem 1995 ). Many premier marketing journals publish meta-analytic review papers too, though authors often must overcome reviewers’ concerns that their contributions are limited due to the absence of “new data.” Furthermore, relatively few non-meta-analysis review papers appear in marketing journals, probably due to researchers’ perceptions that such papers have limited publication opportunities or their beliefs that the field lacks a research tradition or “respect” for such papers. In many cases, an editor must provide strong support to help such review papers navigate the review process. Yet, once published, such papers tend to be widely cited, suggesting that members of the field find them useful (see Bettencourt and Houston 2001 ).

In this editorial, we seek to address three topics relevant to review papers. First, we outline a case for their importance to the scientific process, by describing the purpose of review papers . Second, we detail the review paper editorial initiative conducted over the past two years by the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science ( JAMS ), focused on increasing the prevalence of review papers. Third, we describe a process and structure for systematic ( i.e. , non-meta-analytic) review papers , referring to Grewal et al. ( 2018 ) insights into parallel meta-analytic (effects estimation) review papers. (For some strong recent examples of marketing-related meta-analyses, see Knoll and Matthes 2017 ; Verma et al. 2016 ).

Purpose of review papers

In their most general form, review papers “are critical evaluations of material that has already been published,” some that include quantitative effects estimation (i.e., meta-analyses) and some that do not (i.e., systematic reviews) (Bem 1995 , p. 172). They carefully identify and synthesize relevant literature to evaluate a specific research question, substantive domain, theoretical approach, or methodology and thereby provide readers with a state-of-the-art understanding of the research topic. Many of these benefits are highlighted in Hanssens’ ( 2018 ) paper titled “The Value of Empirical Generalizations in Marketing,” published in this same issue of JAMS.

The purpose of and contributions associated with review papers can vary depending on their specific type and research question, but in general, they aim to

Resolve definitional ambiguities and outline the scope of the topic.

Provide an integrated, synthesized overview of the current state of knowledge.

Identify inconsistencies in prior results and potential explanations (e.g., moderators, mediators, measures, approaches).

Evaluate existing methodological approaches and unique insights.

Develop conceptual frameworks to reconcile and extend past research.

Describe research insights, existing gaps, and future research directions.

Not every review paper can offer all of these benefits, but this list represents their key contributions. To provide a sufficient contribution, a review paper needs to achieve three key standards. First, the research domain needs to be well suited for a review paper, such that a sufficient body of past research exists to make the integration and synthesis valuable—especially if extant research reveals theoretical inconsistences or heterogeneity in its effects. Second, the review paper must be well executed, with an appropriate literature collection and analysis techniques, sufficient breadth and depth of literature coverage, and a compelling writing style. Third, the manuscript must offer significant new insights based on its systematic comparison of multiple studies, rather than simply a “book report” that describes past research. This third, most critical standard is often the most difficult, especially for authors who have not “lived” with the research domain for many years, because achieving it requires drawing some non-obvious connections and insights from multiple studies and their many different aspects (e.g., context, method, measures). Typically, after the “review” portion of the paper has been completed, the authors must spend many more months identifying the connections to uncover incremental insights, each of which takes time to detail and explicate.

The increasing methodological rigor and technical sophistication of many marketing studies also means that they often focus on smaller problems with fewer constructs. By synthesizing these piecemeal findings, reconciling conflicting evidence, and drawing a “big picture,” meta-analyses and systematic review papers become indispensable to our comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon, among both academic and practitioner communities. Thus, good review papers provide a solid platform for future research, in the reviewed domain but also in other areas, in that researchers can use a good review paper to learn about and extend key insights to new areas.

This domain extension, outside of the core area being reviewed, is one of the key benefits of review papers that often gets overlooked. Yet it also is becoming ever more important with the expanding breadth of marketing (e.g., econometric modeling, finance, strategic management, applied psychology, sociology) and the increasing velocity in the accumulation of marketing knowledge (e.g., digital marketing, social media, big data). Against this backdrop, systematic review papers and meta-analyses help academics and interested managers keep track of research findings that fall outside their main area of specialization.

JAMS’ review paper editorial initiative

With a strong belief in the importance of review papers, the editorial team of JAMS has purposely sought out leading scholars to provide substantive review papers, both meta-analysis and systematic, for publication in JAMS . Many of the scholars approached have voiced concerns about the risk of such endeavors, due to the lack of alternative outlets for these types of papers. Therefore, we have instituted a unique process, in which the authors develop a detailed outline of their paper, key tables and figures, and a description of their literature review process. On the basis of this outline, we grant assurances that the contribution hurdle will not be an issue for publication in JAMS , as long as the authors execute the proposed outline as written. Each paper still goes through the normal review process and must meet all publication quality standards, of course. In many cases, an Area Editor takes an active role to help ensure that each paper provides sufficient insights, as required for a high-quality review paper. This process gives the author team confidence to invest effort in the process. An analysis of the marketing journals in the Financial Times (FT 50) journal list for the past five years (2012–2016) shows that JAMS has become the most common outlet for these papers, publishing 31% of all review papers that appeared in the top six marketing journals.

As a next step in positioning JAMS as a receptive marketing outlet for review papers, we are conducting a Thought Leaders Conference on Generalizations in Marketing: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses , with a corresponding special issue (see www.springer.com/jams ). We will continue our process of seeking out review papers as an editorial strategy in areas that could be advanced by the integration and synthesis of extant research. We expect that, ultimately, such efforts will become unnecessary, as authors initiate review papers on topics of their own choosing to submit them to JAMS . In the past two years, JAMS already has increased the number of papers it publishes annually, from just over 40 to around 60 papers per year; this growth has provided “space” for 8–10 review papers per year, reflecting our editorial target.

Consistent with JAMS ’ overall focus on managerially relevant and strategy-focused topics, all review papers should reflect this emphasis. For example, the domains, theories, and methods reviewed need to have some application to past or emerging managerial research. A good rule of thumb is that the substantive domain, theory, or method should attract the attention of readers of JAMS .

The efforts of multiple editors and Area Editors in turn have generated a body of review papers that can serve as useful examples of the different types and approaches that JAMS has published.

Domain-based review papers

Domain-based review papers review, synthetize, and extend a body of literature in the same substantive domain. For example, in “The Role of Privacy in Marketing” (Martin and Murphy 2017 ), the authors identify and define various privacy-related constructs that have appeared in recent literature. Then they examine the different theoretical perspectives brought to bear on privacy topics related to consumers and organizations, including ethical and legal perspectives. These foundations lead in to their systematic review of privacy-related articles over a clearly defined date range, from which they extract key insights from each study. This exercise of synthesizing diverse perspectives allows these authors to describe state-of-the-art knowledge regarding privacy in marketing and identify useful paths for research. Similarly, a new paper by Cleeren et al. ( 2017 ), “Marketing Research on Product-Harm Crises: A Review, Managerial Implications, and an Agenda for Future Research,” provides a rich systematic review, synthesizes extant research, and points the way forward for scholars who are interested in issues related to defective or dangerous market offerings.

Theory-based review papers

Theory-based review papers review, synthetize, and extend a body of literature that uses the same underlying theory. For example, Rindfleisch and Heide’s ( 1997 ) classic review of research in marketing using transaction cost economics has been cited more than 2200 times, with a significant impact on applications of the theory to the discipline in the past 20 years. A recent paper in JAMS with similar intent, which could serve as a helpful model, focuses on “Resource-Based Theory in Marketing” (Kozlenkova et al. 2014 ). The article dives deeply into a description of the theory and its underlying assumptions, then organizes a systematic review of relevant literature according to various perspectives through which the theory has been applied in marketing. The authors conclude by identifying topical domains in marketing that might benefit from additional applications of the theory (e.g., marketing exchange), as well as related theories that could be integrated meaningfully with insights from the resource-based theory.

Method-based review papers

Method-based review papers review, synthetize, and extend a body of literature that uses the same underlying method. For example, in “Event Study Methodology in the Marketing Literature: An Overview” (Sorescu et al. 2017 ), the authors identify published studies in marketing that use an event study methodology. After a brief review of the theoretical foundations of event studies, they describe in detail the key design considerations associated with this method. The article then provides a roadmap for conducting event studies and compares this approach with a stock market returns analysis. The authors finish with a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the event study method, which in turn suggests three main areas for further research. Similarly, “Discriminant Validity Testing in Marketing: An Analysis, Causes for Concern, and Proposed Remedies” (Voorhies et al. 2016 ) systematically reviews existing approaches for assessing discriminant validity in marketing contexts, then uses Monte Carlo simulation to determine which tests are most effective.

Our long-term editorial strategy is to make sure JAMS becomes and remains a well-recognized outlet for both meta-analysis and systematic managerial review papers in marketing. Ideally, review papers would come to represent 10%–20% of the papers published by the journal.

Process and structure for review papers

In this section, we review the process and typical structure of a systematic review paper, which lacks any long or established tradition in marketing research. The article by Grewal et al. ( 2018 ) provides a summary of effects-focused review papers (i.e., meta-analyses), so we do not discuss them in detail here.

Systematic literature review process

Some review papers submitted to journals take a “narrative” approach. They discuss current knowledge about a research domain, yet they often are flawed, in that they lack criteria for article inclusion (or, more accurately, article exclusion), fail to discuss the methodology used to evaluate included articles, and avoid critical assessment of the field (Barczak 2017 ). Such reviews tend to be purely descriptive, with little lasting impact.

In contrast, a systematic literature review aims to “comprehensively locate and synthesize research that bears on a particular question, using organized, transparent, and replicable procedures at each step in the process” (Littell et al. 2008 , p. 1). Littell et al. describe six key steps in the systematic review process. The extent to which each step is emphasized varies by paper, but all are important components of the review.

Topic formulation . The author sets out clear objectives for the review and articulates the specific research questions or hypotheses that will be investigated.

Study design . The author specifies relevant problems, populations, constructs, and settings of interest. The aim is to define explicit criteria that can be used to assess whether any particular study should be included in or excluded from the review. Furthermore, it is important to develop a protocol in advance that describes the procedures and methods to be used to evaluate published work.

Sampling . The aim in this third step is to identify all potentially relevant studies, including both published and unpublished research. To this end, the author must first define the sampling unit to be used in the review (e.g., individual, strategic business unit) and then develop an appropriate sampling plan.

Data collection . By retrieving the potentially relevant studies identified in the third step, the author can determine whether each study meets the eligibility requirements set out in the second step. For studies deemed acceptable, the data are extracted from each study and entered into standardized templates. These templates should be based on the protocols established in step 2.

Data analysis . The degree and nature of the analyses used to describe and examine the collected data vary widely by review. Purely descriptive analysis is useful as a starting point but rarely is sufficient on its own. The examination of trends, clusters of ideas, and multivariate relationships among constructs helps flesh out a deeper understanding of the domain. For example, both Hult ( 2015 ) and Huber et al. ( 2014 ) use bibliometric approaches (e.g., examine citation data using multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis techniques) to identify emerging versus declining themes in the broad field of marketing.

Reporting . Three key aspects of this final step are common across systematic reviews. First, the results from the fifth step need to be presented, clearly and compellingly, using narratives, tables, and figures. Second, core results that emerge from the review must be interpreted and discussed by the author. These revelatory insights should reflect a deeper understanding of the topic being investigated, not simply a regurgitation of well-established knowledge. Third, the author needs to describe the implications of these unique insights for both future research and managerial practice.

A new paper by Watson et al. ( 2017 ), “Harnessing Difference: A Capability-Based Framework for Stakeholder Engagement in Environmental Innovation,” provides a good example of a systematic review, starting with a cohesive conceptual framework that helps establish the boundaries of the review while also identifying core constructs and their relationships. The article then explicitly describes the procedures used to search for potentially relevant papers and clearly sets out criteria for study inclusion or exclusion. Next, a detailed discussion of core elements in the framework weaves published research findings into the exposition. The paper ends with a presentation of key implications and suggestions for the next steps. Similarly, “Marketing Survey Research Best Practices: Evidence and Recommendations from a Review of JAMS Articles” (Hulland et al. 2017 ) systematically reviews published marketing studies that use survey techniques, describes recent trends, and suggests best practices. In their review, Hulland et al. examine the entire population of survey papers published in JAMS over a ten-year span, relying on an extensive standardized data template to facilitate their subsequent data analysis.

Structure of systematic review papers

There is no cookie-cutter recipe for the exact structure of a useful systematic review paper; the final structure depends on the authors’ insights and intended points of emphasis. However, several key components are likely integral to a paper’s ability to contribute.

Depth and rigor

Systematic review papers must avoid falling in to two potential “ditches.” The first ditch threatens when the paper fails to demonstrate that a systematic approach was used for selecting articles for inclusion and capturing their insights. If a reader gets the impression that the author has cherry-picked only articles that fit some preset notion or failed to be thorough enough, without including articles that make significant contributions to the field, the paper will be consigned to the proverbial side of the road when it comes to the discipline’s attention.

Authors that fall into the other ditch present a thorough, complete overview that offers only a mind-numbing recitation, without evident organization, synthesis, or critical evaluation. Although comprehensive, such a paper is more of an index than a useful review. The reviewed articles must be grouped in a meaningful way to guide the reader toward a better understanding of the focal phenomenon and provide a foundation for insights about future research directions. Some scholars organize research by scholarly perspectives (e.g., the psychology of privacy, the economics of privacy; Martin and Murphy 2017 ); others classify the chosen articles by objective research aspects (e.g., empirical setting, research design, conceptual frameworks; Cleeren et al. 2017 ). The method of organization chosen must allow the author to capture the complexity of the underlying phenomenon (e.g., including temporal or evolutionary aspects, if relevant).

Replicability

Processes for the identification and inclusion of research articles should be described in sufficient detail, such that an interested reader could replicate the procedure. The procedures used to analyze chosen articles and extract their empirical findings and/or key takeaways should be described with similar specificity and detail.

We already have noted the potential usefulness of well-done review papers. Some scholars always are new to the field or domain in question, so review papers also need to help them gain foundational knowledge. Key constructs, definitions, assumptions, and theories should be laid out clearly (for which purpose summary tables are extremely helpful). An integrated conceptual model can be useful to organize cited works. Most scholars integrate the knowledge they gain from reading the review paper into their plans for future research, so it is also critical that review papers clearly lay out implications (and specific directions) for research. Ideally, readers will come away from a review article filled with enthusiasm about ways they might contribute to the ongoing development of the field.

Helpful format

Because such a large body of research is being synthesized in most review papers, simply reading through the list of included studies can be exhausting for readers. We cannot overstate the importance of tables and figures in review papers, used in conjunction with meaningful headings and subheadings. Vast literature review tables often are essential, but they must be organized in a way that makes their insights digestible to the reader; in some cases, a sequence of more focused tables may be better than a single, comprehensive table.

In summary, articles that review extant research in a domain (topic, theory, or method) can be incredibly useful to the scientific progress of our field. Whether integrating the insights from extant research through a meta-analysis or synthesizing them through a systematic assessment, the promised benefits are similar. Both formats provide readers with a useful overview of knowledge about the focal phenomenon, as well as insights on key dilemmas and conflicting findings that suggest future research directions. Thus, the editorial team at JAMS encourages scholars to continue to invest the time and effort to construct thoughtful review papers.

Barczak, G. (2017). From the editor: writing a review article. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 34 (2), 120–121.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bem, D. J. (1995). Writing a review article for psychological bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 118 (2), 172–177.

Bettencourt, L. A., & Houston, M. B. (2001). Assessing the impact of article method type and subject area on citation frequency and reference diversity. Marketing Letters, 12 (4), 327–340.

Cleeren, K., Dekimpe, M. G., & van Heerde, H. J. (2017). Marketing research on product-harm crises: a review, managerial implications. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45 (5), 593–615.

Grewal, D., Puccinelli, N. M., & Monroe, K. B. (2018). Meta-analysis: error cancels and truth accrues. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46 (1).

Hanssens, D. M. (2018). The value of empirical generalizations in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46 (1).

Huber, J., Kamakura, W., & Mela, C. F. (2014). A topical history of JMR . Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (1), 84–91.

Hulland, J., Baumgartner, H., & Smith, K. M. (2017). Marketing survey research best practices: evidence and recommendations from a review of JAMS articles. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0532-y .

Hult, G. T. M. (2015). JAMS 2010—2015: literature themes and intellectual structure. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43 (6), 663–669.

Knoll, J., & Matthes, J. (2017). The effectiveness of celebrity endorsements: a meta-analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45 (1), 55–75.

Kozlenkova, I. V., Samaha, S. A., & Palmatier, R. W. (2014). Resource-based theory in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42 (1), 1–21.

Littell, J. H., Corcoran, J., & Pillai, V. (2008). Systematic reviews and meta-analysis . New York: Oxford University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Martin, K. D., & Murphy, P. E. (2017). The role of data privacy in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45 (2), 135–155.

Rindfleisch, A., & Heide, J. B. (1997). Transaction cost analysis: past, present, and future applications. Journal of Marketing, 61 (4), 30–54.

Sorescu, A., Warren, N. L., & Ertekin, L. (2017). Event study methodology in the marketing literature: an overview. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45 (2), 186–207.

Verma, V., Sharma, D., & Sheth, J. (2016). Does relationship marketing matter in online retailing? A meta-analytic approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44 (2), 206–217.

Voorhies, C. M., Brady, M. K., Calantone, R., & Ramirez, E. (2016). Discriminant validity testing in marketing: an analysis, causes for concern, and proposed remedies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44 (1), 119–134.

Watson, R., Wilson, H. N., Smart, P., & Macdonald, E. K. (2017). Harnessing difference: a capability-based framework for stakeholder engagement in environmental innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12394 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Box: 353226, Seattle, WA, 98195-3226, USA

Robert W. Palmatier

Neeley School of Business, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX, USA

Mark B. Houston

Terry College of Business, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

John Hulland

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert W. Palmatier .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Palmatier, R.W., Houston, M.B. & Hulland, J. Review articles: purpose, process, and structure. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 46 , 1–5 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0563-4

Download citation

Published : 02 October 2017

Issue Date : January 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0563-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research