PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 13, 2025International Journal of Consumer Studies3 citations

Advancing Systematic Literature Reviews With Artificial Intelligence: A TCCM‐Based Synthesis of Over 50 Years of Double Jeopardy Research

View Full Paper
ZAZachary William AnesburyLSLara Stocchi

Key Points

  • AI significantly reduces coding time and costs, achieving inter-coder reliability scores as high as 96%.
  • The study synthesizes 179 peer-reviewed publications over 50 years, highlighting the importance of Double Jeopardy in marketing research.
  • Utilizing a HITL approach, the method combines AI with human oversight for rigorous literature reviews.
  • This research underscores the need for transparent bibliometric methods and the role technology plays in knowledge synthesis.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Combining artificial intelligence (AI) with a human‐in‐the‐loop (HITL) approach, this study advances framework‐based systematic literature reviews, showcasing how to harness advanced technologies for high‐quality integrations of marketing knowledge. The proposed approach leverages the Theory–Context–Characteristics–Methodology (TCCM) framework for classifying and validating scientific knowledge, and combines AI and HITL iterations for a rigorous, speedy, and scalable review method. AI can substantially reduce manual coding time and costs, achieving coding performance with inter‐coder reliability scores ranging from 96% (ChatGPT‐4o) to 83% (Gemini Advanced). The highest‐performing AI platform, with Cohen's Kappa ( κ = 0.95), is used to undertake the initial steps of the systematic literature review process, followed by HITL review to identify and resolve discrepancies. To demonstrate the value and results of this approach, this study presents a systematic synthesis of 179 academic, peer‐reviewed publications and 50 years of marketing research on Double Jeopardy—a widely established, empirically‐derived theory. The proposed review method surpasses software‐based alternatives while meeting the requirements of impactful, replicable, and transparent bibliometric research. This research makes substantial contributions to contemporary scholarly discourses on the value of systematic knowledge syntheses for both academia and practice, as well as the scope of technological advancements, or “smart bibliometrics.”

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Anesbury et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68ed4e04d3b1bfa344c601a3https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.70126
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Ethnocentrism and Consumer Animosity: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda Using TCCM Framework2025 · 11 citations
  2. 2Traffic metrics and Web 2.0‐ness2010 · 14 citations
  3. 3Do arts audiences act like consumers?2011 · 19 citations
  4. 4Brand image and brand loyalty: Do they show the same deviations from a common underlying pattern?2015 · 38 citations
  5. 5Ad avoidance in the digital context: A systematic literature review and research agenda2022 · 93 citations