Loading…

Marketing academicians’ perceptions of ethical research and publishing behavior

A study is designed to collect academicians' evaluations of the ethical nature of a large range of editor, reviewer, and author practices. A sample of 900 subjects was selected from the 1987 American Marketing Association membership directory via systematic random sampling; 328 usable responses...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1989-10, Vol.17 (4), p.315-324
Main Authors: Sherrell, Daniel L, Hair, Joseph F, Griffin, Mitch
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:A study is designed to collect academicians' evaluations of the ethical nature of a large range of editor, reviewer, and author practices. A sample of 900 subjects was selected from the 1987 American Marketing Association membership directory via systematic random sampling; 328 usable responses to a mailed questionnaire were returned. Results showed that practices, such as authors altering data, reviewers stealing an author's ideas after rejecting a manuscript, or editors showing favoritism, almost universally were viewed as unethical conduct. However, submitting the same manuscript to 2 journals aimed at different audiences or agreeing to review a manuscript for a journal when the reviewer already had reviewed and rejected the manuscript for another journal were behaviors that evoked varied responses among subjects regarding their ethicality. The differences in ethical judgments across publication activity subgroups suggest that evaluations were based on an individual respondent's sense of ethics, not on universally held standards within the marketing academic community. A recognized code of ethics for the marketing academic community is suggested.
ISSN:0092-0703
1552-7824
DOI:10.1007/BF02726642