Marketing academicians’ perceptions of ethical research and publishing behavior

• 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: Behavior; Ethics; Marketing; Morality; Social responsibility; Studies
• ISSN: 0092-0703; 1552-7824
• DOI: 10.1007/BF02726642

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.