The first issue of the JMR was published forty years ago, at a time when I was still in high school, and four years before I became interested in marketing. My interest was stimulated after I moved from the Netherlands to the United States. The American Marketing Association created a new journal in 1964 partly in response to researchers’ demands for an outlet that would publish papers with a scientific orientation. To witness, the president of the AMA emphasized that the journal was intended to advance science in marketing (Davidson, 1964). I note that the journal was started just a few years after the Gordon-Howell report (Gordon and Howell, 1959) that stimulated the incorporation of core disciplines in research at business schools. Consistent with this idea, Davidson makes reference to the intent for the JMR to publish applications of quantitative methods and behavioral science approaches to marketing problems. During the forty years of the journal’s existence, the nature and focus of research in marketing has changed dramatically. Yet the two arguments made by Davidson, to advance science in marketing and to publish applications of quantitative methods and behavioral science approaches are just as applicable today. In this editorial I briefly
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dick R. Wittink (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: