Themes and Topics of Research in Marketing: A Content Analysis of the Articles Published in Three Marketing Journals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed at classifying the themes of marketing in the articles published in three top journals in the field of marketing from 2010 to 2014. At the same time, the study aimed at identifying the researchers’ interest and topics in each theme. The study findings demonstrated that the Journal of Marketing Research has got a share of 39% of the total published articles of those three journals, compared to 35% for the Marketing Science journal, and 26% for the Journal of Marketing. With respect to the research themes, extensive interest has been given to consumer behavior at 22%, e-marketing at 10%, advertising at 7%, promotion and pricing at 7% each, product development at 5%, and marketing management at 4%. The study also concluded the researchers’ negligence of important themes in marketing theory, such as: marketing ethics, international marketing, social responsibility, service marketing, competitive analysis, and customer relationship management. Moreover, The study found that each of the three journals has extensively published on some specific themes compared to the other two journals. The journal of Marketing Science has published more articles on e-marketing, channels of distribution, competitive analysis, and marketing ethics. The Journal of Marketing has published more articles on branding, sales and sales management, value creation, services and service quality, customer relationship management, international marketing, social responsibility, and customer loyalty. The Journal of Marketing Research has published more articles on consumer behavior, branding, pricing, retailing, and customer satisfaction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".