nach oben

Erschienen in:

2019 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

9. Generalizability of Research Results

verfasst von : Martin Eisend, Alfred Kuss

Erschienen in: Research Methodology in Marketing

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

An essential element of scientific realism is the frequent and long-term corroboration of statements based on empirical tests. From an empirical perspective, it is about the question of generalizability, and to what extent empirical findings on the same statement found in various other studies are confirmed. The current chapter deals with approaches in which different results are summarized for the same research topic (meta-analyses: Sect. 9.3) or new investigations are conducted to check previous results (replication studies; Sect. 9.2).

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Testing Causal Relationships

Nächstes Kapitel Research Ethics and Research Practice

Boyd, R. (2002). Scientific realism. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu.

Briesch, R. A., Krishnamurthi, L., Mazumdar, T., & Raj, S. P. (1997). A comparative analysis of reference price models. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 202–214.CrossRef

Cronbach, L. J., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of Generalizability for scores and profiles. New York: Wiley.

Eisend, M., Franke, G. R., & Leigh, J. H. (2016). Reinquiries in advertising research. Journal of Advertising, 45(1), 1–3.CrossRef

Evanschitzky, H., Baumgarth, C., Hubbard, R., & Armstrong, J. S. (2007). Replication research’s disturbing trend. Journal of Business Research, 60(4), 411–415.CrossRef

Ferguson, C. J., & Brannick, M. T. (2012). Publication Bias in psychological science: Prevalence, methods for identifying and controlling, and implications for the use of meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 17(1), 120–128.CrossRef

Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5(10), 3–8.CrossRef

Hoyer, W. D., MacInnis, D. J., & Pieters, R. (2018). Consumer behavior (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage.

Hubbard, R., & Vetter, D. E. (1996). An empirical comparison of published replication research in accounting, finance, management and marketing. Journal of Business Research, 35(2), 153–164.CrossRef

Hunt, S. D. (2012). Explaining empirically successful marketing theories: The inductive realist model, approximate truth, and market orientation. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 2(1), 5–18.

Hunter, J. E. (2001). The desperate need for replications. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 149–158.CrossRef

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.CrossRef

Kelley, K., & Preacher, K. J. (2012). On effect size. Psychological Methods, 17(2), 137–152.CrossRef

Kepes, S., Banks, G. C., McDaniel, M., & Whetzel, D. L. (2012). Publication Bias in the organizational sciences. Organizational Research Methods, 15(4), 624–662.CrossRef

Kerlinger, F., & Lee, H. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). Melbourne: Wadsworth.

Kivetz, R., Netzer, O., & Srinivasan, V. S. (2004). Alternative models for capturing the compromise effect. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(3), 237–257.CrossRef

Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kwon, E. S., Shan, Y., Lee, J. S., & Reid, L. N. (2017). Inter-study and intra-study replications in leading marketing journals: A longitudinal analysis. European Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 257–278.CrossRef

Lehmann, D. R., Gupta, S., & Steckel, J. (1998). Marketing research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Lynch, J. G., Jr., Bradlow, E. T., Huber, J. C., & Lehmann, D. R. (2015). Reflections on the replication corner: In praise of conceptual replications. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32(4), 333–342.CrossRef

Mazumdar, T., & Papatla, P. (2000). An investigation of reference price segments. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), 246–258.CrossRef

McCullough, B. D., & Vinod, H. (2003). Verifying the solution from a nonlinear solver: A case study. American Economic Review, 94(1), 873–892.CrossRef

Neumann, N., & Böckenholt, U. (2014). A meta-analysis of loss aversion in product choice. Journal of Retailing, 90(2), 182–197.CrossRef

Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), 943.CrossRef

Reid, L. N., Rotfeld, H. J., & Wimmer, R. D. (1982). How researchers respond to replications requests. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 216–218.CrossRef

Renkewitz, F., Fuchs, H. M., & Fiedler, S. (2011). Is there evidence of publication Bias in JDM research? Judgment and Decision making, 6(8), 870–881.

Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (Eds.). (2005). Publication Bias in meta-analysis. Prevention, assessment and adjustments. Chichester: Wiley.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4), 1039–1061.CrossRef

Weick, K. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 385–390.CrossRef

Wicherts, J. M., Borsboom, D., Kats, J., & Molenaar, D. (2006). The poor availability of psychological research data for reanalysis. American Psychologist, 61(7), 726–728.CrossRef