- Email: [email protected]
On the Path to Knowledge Development
JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY, 16(4),321-323 Copyright O 2006, Lawrence Erlbaurn Associates, Inc.
EDITORIAL
On the Path to Knowledge Development I consider the facilitation of knowledge development to be my central focus as editor. The editor makes the final decision on whether a specific research effort significantly advances our understanding of a substantive phenomenon. To that extent, the editor assumes a leadership role and responsibility in deciding the future direction of the field. Such important decisions should reflect the prevailing norms of the field and transcend the editor's individual research agenda or hislher selective worldview. I strive to make decisions that are shared by reviewers and associate editors with the common goal of moving the field forward in productive ways. As a result, articles published in JCP represent a collective view of what is considered significant theoretical contribution and rigorous methodology. In this note, I highlight some central elements of my philosophy related to knowledge development and share a few observations about policies that I have employed in managing the consensual review process.
that represent unfamiliar yet important views and new directions. In other words, it is easy to get boxed in by our own worldview and fail to recognize and accept contrasting and diverse views. However, to grow, the field needs to incorporate new and unique views. This task requires the editor to actively seek and encourage emerging paradigms. I consider the presentation of meaningful new knowledge to the field to be one of the important responsibilities of the editor. JCP is uniquely qualified to perform this role effectively. The unique strength of JCP is its considerable dual equity in the fields of psychology and marketing. This exposure to both basic and applied fields has made it possible for JCP to assume a leadership role in knowledge creation. In the following section, the activities related to knowledge creation are discussed.
Knowledge Creation KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT: THE CONTENT In my view, knowledge development consists of two related but distinct dimensions: knowledge creation and knowledge extension. Knowledge creation involves bringing in new paradigms and new ways of evaluating evidence in a given area. Knowledge extension consists of presenting views that advance our existing knowledge and framework in incremental ways. The modal task represented by the articles submitted for publication is knowledge extension. These articles are based on an established framework and present findings that address existing gaps in the literature. Such knowledge extension incorporates an evaluative function where the editor, in conjunction with other experts in a domain, makes a decision as to whether an article has met the standards of publication. I seek to make this evaluative process consensual, by integrating the views of the reviewers and the stated objectives of the authors. I view the creation of new knowledge as more challenging, since the editor assumes the responsibility of deciding what new knowledge is and whether it will enrich our understanding of consumer behavior. It is not often that articles are submitted and subsequently encouraged by the reviewers
Journal of Consumer Psychology recognizes the pivotal role that innovative and emerging research frameworks play in advancing our theoretical understanding of consumer behavior. These frameworks form the basis for developing research programs that challenge our existing assumptions about the psychology of consumption, explore intellectual routes that are less traveled, and address the gaps that exist in our current view of the consumer. In accord with its mission of knowledge creation, JCP has pioneered the "Research Dialogue" feature that presents divergent views on paradigms that are theoretically promising, but are as yet unfamiliar to researchers in the consumer domain. These dialogues have a discussion format that features a central article and a set of commentaries based on the target article. The leading piece is written by a well-regarded scholar who has considerable expertise in that domain. The article presents a brief overview of the emerging paradigm, discusses relevant empirical work in that area, and often incorporates data as yet unpublished. The commentaries are invited from scholars who would critically examine the relevance of the featured paradigm to various research areas in consumer context and highlight specific research premises that could be further explored. This dialogue has been well received in the past and has been instrumental in generating considerable follow-up work in the consumer context. Some of the recent research areas that have
322
MAHESWARAN
been featured are Thin Slice Judgments (Alba, 2006; Ambady, Krabbenhoft, & Hogan, 2006; Kardes, 2006; Peracchio & Luna 2006) and Dual-System Model of Consumer Behavior (MacInnis & Patrick, 2006; Strack, Werth, & Deutsch, 2006; Vohs, 2006). The Research Dialogue section has demonstrated that, in addition to empirical work, the cause of knowledge creation can also be effectively served by a critical examination of the constructs that are central to the conceptualization of empirical investigation. The synergy and contribution made by the Research Dialogue section to the central mission of JCP have made it an easy decision to continue this section in the forthcoming issues. So, JCP will continue to periodically publish Research Dialogues on topics that represent emerging paradigms and cutting-edge knowledge developments that are relatively new to consumer behavior. This issue will feature the first of the several dialogues that will appear under the new editorship and initiated by the new associate editor, Norbert Schwarz. Sharon Shavitt and colleagues present a thought-provoking view of the individualism-collectivism framework that has been instrumental in examining culture-based differences in human behavior around the world (Shavitt, 2006a, 2006b). Leading scholars who represent various domains of culture-based research have provided excellent discussions on the efficacy of this framework to diverse applied domains (Aaker, 2006; Meyers-Levy, 2006; Oy serman, 2006). Developing on the same notion of rethinking consumer psychology in a new light, this issue features the Presidential Address by Dipankar Chakravarti delivered at the Society for Consumer Psychology conference in 2004. In his address, Dipankar presents a compelling set of arguments as to why it is important for consumer researchers to make it a priority to examine the problems associated with poverty. He discusses the psychological implications of being poor and outlines several strategies for addressing the problems facing the less fortunate in society. He argues that consumer researchers could contribute significantly to our understanding of the issues unique to this segment and help to improve the effectiveness of the intervention strategies.
Knowledge Extension Three articles that have been submitted under the new editorship appear in this issue. These articles represent the best of the knowledge extension dimension of JCP, empirical research based on sound theoretical framework, and incorporating rigorous methodology and converging evidence. The article by Yoon, Giirhan-Canli, and Schwarz (2006) examines the role of consumers' perceptions of corporate social activities in influencing their subsequent evaluations. Based on theories of attribution and suspicion, three experiments highlight the mediating role of perceived sincerity of motives in determining the effectiveness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) related activities. The article by Basil and Herr
(2006) examines how the principles of Balance Theory offer unique insights into the consumer domain of cause-related marketing (CRM). Two experiments demonstrate that pre-existing organizational attitudes influence consumer response to cause-related marketing alliances. The last article is by White and Dahl(2006). In a series of three studies, these authors investigate the effects of dissociative reference groups on consumer preferences. They suggest that self-presentation concerns may drive dissociative reference group effects.
KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT: THE PROCESS
I aim to publish research that is of very high quality and I believe that by working with the associate editors, authors, and reviewers, this objective can be easily achieved. I attempt to provide constructive and actionable feedback to the authors regardless of the outcome of their manuscript. I am extremely thankful to the associate editors, the editorial review board, the reviewers, and the authors who work together to ensure a rigorous yet constructive review process at JCP. The reviewers and the editorial board are critical to the success of the review process. I am well aware of the enormous time commitment required of reviewers and that reviewing is primarily a service to the field. So, I try to make the review process more efficient and less time consuming for the reviewers by taking on more responsibility after the first review. In general, theoretical contribution and methodological rigor are the key determinants of acceptance of a manuscript. If a manuscript is deemed to have met the high standards on both these dimensions by the evaluators, the manuscript will be revised with a favorable prognosis. Unfortunately, given the high standards set by the reviewers for JCP, most articles do not fall into this category. We are often in the context of an acceptable level in one dimension and an inadequate level in the other dimension. The determining criterion in this situation is the extent of theoretical contribution. If the article presents unique theoretical insights, but the reviewers are not convinced by the strength or the extent of correspondence of the data to the theoretical propositions, the authors are given an opportunity to unequivocally establish the empirical validity through additional data collection efforts. In contrast, in the reverse of this scenario, where the data are strong but the contribution to theory is minimal, the manuscript will be rejected. Regardless of the outcome, I provide constructive feedback to manuscripts with a view to help the authors improve the contribution of their manuscript for publication in JCP or elsewhere. I encourage reviewers to provide feedback that is thoughtful and clearly delineates the critical issues in the first review. A decision to invite a revision is made based on my own reading of the manuscript and the recommendations of the evaluators. The authors are given specific guidelines that
EDITORIAL
strike a balance between reviewers' expectations and the authors' efforts. These are often a set of concrete directions for additional data collection and strategies for enhancing the contribution and presentation of the manuscript. If authors are able to effectively meet these expectations, the manuscript will be accepted subsequently. Providing specific and actionable guidelines has enabled the authors to address the issues effectively and the editorial team to minimize the number of revisions needed to bring a manuscript to acceptance. This approach has helped to guide promising research toward excellence and contribute significantly to the knowledge development mission of JCP
CONCLUSION I discussed my editorial philosophy in detail, in a note, soon after I was elected as the editor (Maheswaran, 2006). Nine months later, I am pleased to receive feedback from the authors and reviewers that the current editorial team at JCP is doing an excellent job of knowledge development and dissemination in consumer psychology. I am confident that the enthusiasm and support shown by authors, reviewers, and the editorial team will continue to sustain the momentum of the journal and propel it forward in its quest for excellence. Durairaj Maheswaran October 2006
323
REFERENCES Alba, J. W. (2006). Let the clips fall where they may. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16( I), 14-1 9. Ambady, N., Krabbenhoft, M. A., & Hogan, D. (2006). The 30-sec sale: Using thin-slice judgments to evaluate sales effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(1), 4-1 3. Basil, D. Z., & Herr, P. M. (2006). Attitudinal balance and cause-related marketing: An empirical application of balance theory. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 391407. Chaknvarti, D. (2006). Voices unheard: The consumer psychology of poverty and development. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 363-376. Kardes, F. R. (2006). When should consumers and managers trust their intuition? Journal of Consumer Psycholog): 16(1), 20-24. MacInnis, D. J., & Patrick, V. M. (2006). Spotlight on affect: Affect and affective forecasting in impulse control. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(3), 224-231. Maheswaran, D. (2006). Editorial. Journal of Consumer Psychologj, 16(1), 1-3. Peracchio, L. A,, & Luna, D. (2006). The role of thin-slice judgments in consumer psychology. Journal of Consumer Psycholog) 16(1), 25-32. Strack, F., Werth, L., & Deutsch, R. (2006). Reflective and impulsive determinants of consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(3), 205-2 16. Vohs, K. D. (2006). Self-regulatory resources power the reflective system: Evidence from five domains. Journal of Consumer Psj~clzology,16(3), 2 17-223. White, K., & Dahl, D. W. (2006). To be or not be? The influence of dissociative reference groups on consumer preferences. Journal of Conrumer Psychology. Yoon, Y., Giirhan-Canli, Z., & Schwarz, N. (2006). When doing good is bad for you: Backfire effects of corporate social responsibility activities. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 404414.
EDITORIAL
On the Path to Knowledge Development I consider the facilitation of knowledge development to be my central focus as editor. The editor makes the final decision on whether a specific research effort significantly advances our understanding of a substantive phenomenon. To that extent, the editor assumes a leadership role and responsibility in deciding the future direction of the field. Such important decisions should reflect the prevailing norms of the field and transcend the editor's individual research agenda or hislher selective worldview. I strive to make decisions that are shared by reviewers and associate editors with the common goal of moving the field forward in productive ways. As a result, articles published in JCP represent a collective view of what is considered significant theoretical contribution and rigorous methodology. In this note, I highlight some central elements of my philosophy related to knowledge development and share a few observations about policies that I have employed in managing the consensual review process.
that represent unfamiliar yet important views and new directions. In other words, it is easy to get boxed in by our own worldview and fail to recognize and accept contrasting and diverse views. However, to grow, the field needs to incorporate new and unique views. This task requires the editor to actively seek and encourage emerging paradigms. I consider the presentation of meaningful new knowledge to the field to be one of the important responsibilities of the editor. JCP is uniquely qualified to perform this role effectively. The unique strength of JCP is its considerable dual equity in the fields of psychology and marketing. This exposure to both basic and applied fields has made it possible for JCP to assume a leadership role in knowledge creation. In the following section, the activities related to knowledge creation are discussed.
Knowledge Creation KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT: THE CONTENT In my view, knowledge development consists of two related but distinct dimensions: knowledge creation and knowledge extension. Knowledge creation involves bringing in new paradigms and new ways of evaluating evidence in a given area. Knowledge extension consists of presenting views that advance our existing knowledge and framework in incremental ways. The modal task represented by the articles submitted for publication is knowledge extension. These articles are based on an established framework and present findings that address existing gaps in the literature. Such knowledge extension incorporates an evaluative function where the editor, in conjunction with other experts in a domain, makes a decision as to whether an article has met the standards of publication. I seek to make this evaluative process consensual, by integrating the views of the reviewers and the stated objectives of the authors. I view the creation of new knowledge as more challenging, since the editor assumes the responsibility of deciding what new knowledge is and whether it will enrich our understanding of consumer behavior. It is not often that articles are submitted and subsequently encouraged by the reviewers
Journal of Consumer Psychology recognizes the pivotal role that innovative and emerging research frameworks play in advancing our theoretical understanding of consumer behavior. These frameworks form the basis for developing research programs that challenge our existing assumptions about the psychology of consumption, explore intellectual routes that are less traveled, and address the gaps that exist in our current view of the consumer. In accord with its mission of knowledge creation, JCP has pioneered the "Research Dialogue" feature that presents divergent views on paradigms that are theoretically promising, but are as yet unfamiliar to researchers in the consumer domain. These dialogues have a discussion format that features a central article and a set of commentaries based on the target article. The leading piece is written by a well-regarded scholar who has considerable expertise in that domain. The article presents a brief overview of the emerging paradigm, discusses relevant empirical work in that area, and often incorporates data as yet unpublished. The commentaries are invited from scholars who would critically examine the relevance of the featured paradigm to various research areas in consumer context and highlight specific research premises that could be further explored. This dialogue has been well received in the past and has been instrumental in generating considerable follow-up work in the consumer context. Some of the recent research areas that have
322
MAHESWARAN
been featured are Thin Slice Judgments (Alba, 2006; Ambady, Krabbenhoft, & Hogan, 2006; Kardes, 2006; Peracchio & Luna 2006) and Dual-System Model of Consumer Behavior (MacInnis & Patrick, 2006; Strack, Werth, & Deutsch, 2006; Vohs, 2006). The Research Dialogue section has demonstrated that, in addition to empirical work, the cause of knowledge creation can also be effectively served by a critical examination of the constructs that are central to the conceptualization of empirical investigation. The synergy and contribution made by the Research Dialogue section to the central mission of JCP have made it an easy decision to continue this section in the forthcoming issues. So, JCP will continue to periodically publish Research Dialogues on topics that represent emerging paradigms and cutting-edge knowledge developments that are relatively new to consumer behavior. This issue will feature the first of the several dialogues that will appear under the new editorship and initiated by the new associate editor, Norbert Schwarz. Sharon Shavitt and colleagues present a thought-provoking view of the individualism-collectivism framework that has been instrumental in examining culture-based differences in human behavior around the world (Shavitt, 2006a, 2006b). Leading scholars who represent various domains of culture-based research have provided excellent discussions on the efficacy of this framework to diverse applied domains (Aaker, 2006; Meyers-Levy, 2006; Oy serman, 2006). Developing on the same notion of rethinking consumer psychology in a new light, this issue features the Presidential Address by Dipankar Chakravarti delivered at the Society for Consumer Psychology conference in 2004. In his address, Dipankar presents a compelling set of arguments as to why it is important for consumer researchers to make it a priority to examine the problems associated with poverty. He discusses the psychological implications of being poor and outlines several strategies for addressing the problems facing the less fortunate in society. He argues that consumer researchers could contribute significantly to our understanding of the issues unique to this segment and help to improve the effectiveness of the intervention strategies.
Knowledge Extension Three articles that have been submitted under the new editorship appear in this issue. These articles represent the best of the knowledge extension dimension of JCP, empirical research based on sound theoretical framework, and incorporating rigorous methodology and converging evidence. The article by Yoon, Giirhan-Canli, and Schwarz (2006) examines the role of consumers' perceptions of corporate social activities in influencing their subsequent evaluations. Based on theories of attribution and suspicion, three experiments highlight the mediating role of perceived sincerity of motives in determining the effectiveness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) related activities. The article by Basil and Herr
(2006) examines how the principles of Balance Theory offer unique insights into the consumer domain of cause-related marketing (CRM). Two experiments demonstrate that pre-existing organizational attitudes influence consumer response to cause-related marketing alliances. The last article is by White and Dahl(2006). In a series of three studies, these authors investigate the effects of dissociative reference groups on consumer preferences. They suggest that self-presentation concerns may drive dissociative reference group effects.
KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT: THE PROCESS
I aim to publish research that is of very high quality and I believe that by working with the associate editors, authors, and reviewers, this objective can be easily achieved. I attempt to provide constructive and actionable feedback to the authors regardless of the outcome of their manuscript. I am extremely thankful to the associate editors, the editorial review board, the reviewers, and the authors who work together to ensure a rigorous yet constructive review process at JCP. The reviewers and the editorial board are critical to the success of the review process. I am well aware of the enormous time commitment required of reviewers and that reviewing is primarily a service to the field. So, I try to make the review process more efficient and less time consuming for the reviewers by taking on more responsibility after the first review. In general, theoretical contribution and methodological rigor are the key determinants of acceptance of a manuscript. If a manuscript is deemed to have met the high standards on both these dimensions by the evaluators, the manuscript will be revised with a favorable prognosis. Unfortunately, given the high standards set by the reviewers for JCP, most articles do not fall into this category. We are often in the context of an acceptable level in one dimension and an inadequate level in the other dimension. The determining criterion in this situation is the extent of theoretical contribution. If the article presents unique theoretical insights, but the reviewers are not convinced by the strength or the extent of correspondence of the data to the theoretical propositions, the authors are given an opportunity to unequivocally establish the empirical validity through additional data collection efforts. In contrast, in the reverse of this scenario, where the data are strong but the contribution to theory is minimal, the manuscript will be rejected. Regardless of the outcome, I provide constructive feedback to manuscripts with a view to help the authors improve the contribution of their manuscript for publication in JCP or elsewhere. I encourage reviewers to provide feedback that is thoughtful and clearly delineates the critical issues in the first review. A decision to invite a revision is made based on my own reading of the manuscript and the recommendations of the evaluators. The authors are given specific guidelines that
EDITORIAL
strike a balance between reviewers' expectations and the authors' efforts. These are often a set of concrete directions for additional data collection and strategies for enhancing the contribution and presentation of the manuscript. If authors are able to effectively meet these expectations, the manuscript will be accepted subsequently. Providing specific and actionable guidelines has enabled the authors to address the issues effectively and the editorial team to minimize the number of revisions needed to bring a manuscript to acceptance. This approach has helped to guide promising research toward excellence and contribute significantly to the knowledge development mission of JCP
CONCLUSION I discussed my editorial philosophy in detail, in a note, soon after I was elected as the editor (Maheswaran, 2006). Nine months later, I am pleased to receive feedback from the authors and reviewers that the current editorial team at JCP is doing an excellent job of knowledge development and dissemination in consumer psychology. I am confident that the enthusiasm and support shown by authors, reviewers, and the editorial team will continue to sustain the momentum of the journal and propel it forward in its quest for excellence. Durairaj Maheswaran October 2006
323
REFERENCES Alba, J. W. (2006). Let the clips fall where they may. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16( I), 14-1 9. Ambady, N., Krabbenhoft, M. A., & Hogan, D. (2006). The 30-sec sale: Using thin-slice judgments to evaluate sales effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(1), 4-1 3. Basil, D. Z., & Herr, P. M. (2006). Attitudinal balance and cause-related marketing: An empirical application of balance theory. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 391407. Chaknvarti, D. (2006). Voices unheard: The consumer psychology of poverty and development. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 363-376. Kardes, F. R. (2006). When should consumers and managers trust their intuition? Journal of Consumer Psycholog): 16(1), 20-24. MacInnis, D. J., & Patrick, V. M. (2006). Spotlight on affect: Affect and affective forecasting in impulse control. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(3), 224-231. Maheswaran, D. (2006). Editorial. Journal of Consumer Psychologj, 16(1), 1-3. Peracchio, L. A,, & Luna, D. (2006). The role of thin-slice judgments in consumer psychology. Journal of Consumer Psycholog) 16(1), 25-32. Strack, F., Werth, L., & Deutsch, R. (2006). Reflective and impulsive determinants of consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(3), 205-2 16. Vohs, K. D. (2006). Self-regulatory resources power the reflective system: Evidence from five domains. Journal of Consumer Psj~clzology,16(3), 2 17-223. White, K., & Dahl, D. W. (2006). To be or not be? The influence of dissociative reference groups on consumer preferences. Journal of Conrumer Psychology. Yoon, Y., Giirhan-Canli, Z., & Schwarz, N. (2006). When doing good is bad for you: Backfire effects of corporate social responsibility activities. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 404414.