摘要
营销学科的发展已有上百年的历史,但是真正的科学研究只有五十年的历史,营销学科是在经济学的基础上发展起来的,而营销学科的科学研究被认为受到心理学的影响较深。在长达五十年的研究历程中,不断有学者关注营销学科的研究状况与走势,从肯定的、追踪的角度去评价过去。然而随着研究队伍的不断扩大以及研究产出的日益增长,通过传统的文献阅读了解学科领域的发展状况已经越来越困难。进入二十一世纪,营销研究越来越国际化,但是否定的、批判的声音开始此起彼伏,来自欧洲和澳洲的学者认为营销学术研究不够国际化,而来自美国的学者批评当前的营销学术研究走向分裂与衰退。尽管有各种批评的声音,但是用理论和数据从总体上展现和说明市场营销学现状的研究却很罕见,本研究力图从全局上展现市场营销学的现状与发展趋势,解答疑惑并寻找发展方向。
本研究通过科学计量学的方法从期刊、作者、知识三个角度全面地展现营销学科的发展现状,使用可视化的知识图谱呈现全局性的发展状态和阶段性的发展历程,以便更好地把握整个学科的发展面貌,更好地思考发展的方向,回答和解释当前对营销学科发展的一些疑问和争议。
本研究的创新性体现在研究问题、研究视角和工具的使用三个方面,主要工作涉及如下四点：(1)从纵向与横向的视角全面地审视营销学科的现状；(2)基于社会网络分析的理论评价期刊、作者与知识单元；(3)使用多个学科发展的理论模型相互印证学科发展的状态；(4)对国内营销学科的研究趋势进行了全程的客观分析。
论文可以分为三大部分,第一部分包括三章内容,除了第一章绪论,其它两章分别对市场营销学的发展历程和本研究使用的方法做了简单的介绍。第二章对市场营销学的发展历程进行梳理,并指出市场营销学的思考角度、研究范畴和专业领域的变化,说明其它学科对市场营销学的作用和影响,以作为最终研究结果参照、比较和解释的依据。第三章对科学计量学和可视化技术的原理、方法和技术作了说明,介绍其应用的优点及缺点,以更好地发挥工具的效果,避免工具带来的问题,也能更加客观和准确地解释研究的结果。
第二部分是本研究的重点,也包括三章内容,分别从期刊网络、作者合著网络与知识网络三个层面展现营销学科的整体发展态势。第四章从营销期刊入手,从表层掌握学科的发展状况。通过对稳定发行的六十八本营销期刊的引文分析,构建营销的期刊网络,展现营销学科期刊之间的关联,从期刊的角度探讨学科成熟度、学科知识的传播路径与传播主导力量。研究结果显示,营销学科期刊的核心网络包括十七本期刊,与营销学科密切相关的学科依次是管理学、心理学和经济学,学科期刊已形成几个稳定的旗舰期刊。从营销期刊的知识传播网络判断营销学科已经是成熟学科,从营销学期刊的角度可以将营销知识分为五大类。
在构建营销期刊网络的过程中,也与过去的营销期刊评价的研究进行了比较,基于引文分析的研究能做到客观稳定的评价。传统的主观评价的研究由于地区的不同、所属机构性质的不同、机构大小的不同、个人特征等方面的差异,而对期刊的评价产生了较大的差异,但是也存在一定的共识,比较确定的认同是顶级期刊,基于引文数量的评价虽然可以客观地评价期刊,但是结果易于被操纵,通过社会网络的期刊评价从原理上讲,可以较为稳定地评价期刊的表现。
第五章从作者合作的角度研究营销学科的发展变化。通过对三种营销学科的旗舰期刊的作者合著的分析,展现了营销学科的无形学院,并从作者合作的角度探讨研究合作的趋势、作者合作与研究产出以及研究质量的关系、营销学科的发展阶段。研究结果显示,营销学科的研究者之间的合作越来越密切,合作的规模越来越大,也越来越频繁。从合作与否的角度分析,合作与被引频次之间存在显著相关,而且短期内的被引频次受合作与否的影响更大,但是从合作人数与被引频次看,不管是长期还是短期,作者人数的增加并没有显著影响被引频次。从四个阶段的作者合著网络判断,营销学科目前处于逐渐趋于统一的成熟期,而不是逐渐分裂的衰退期,这个结论与期刊引文的分析结果是一致的。
合著研究还从国家、机构和作者三个层面评价营销研究的主要生产者。从国家层面看,作为营销学科发源地的美国是当之无愧的第一位,依照网络中心性的评价指标看,荷兰在营销学科的影响力要大于加拿大,中国也有不错的表现,但主要是香港学者的贡献,德国、法国、英国在顶级营销学术研究上也有不错的表现。从机构的层面看,最近十年的高产机构是宾夕法尼亚大学,杜克大学居第二位,西北大学第三位,传统营销研究发源地、研究导向型大学和经济发达地区的机构都有竞争力,高水平机构并不集中于某个地区,也不完全由知名大学掌握,一些不那么知名的大学在营销学科建设上也表现卓越。从作者层面看,由于作者的产出不像机构那么稳定,十年的产出评价与三十年的产出评价相比变化很大。
第六章从研究主题入手深入分析营销学科的知识单元与知识结构,详细地把握学科的内在脉络。研究通过词频统计分析营销学科研究的当前热点,通过共现网络从三个层面揭示学科层面、专业层面、方向层面的知识网络,对照营销学界关于营销学科知识的分类以及营销学科体系在教材或者研究中的组织结构,展现客观的知识网络结构构建的优势。研究结果表明,营销学科研究的热点是消费者行为、品牌管理、关系营销、产品管理、服务营销、广告和营销战略等领域。从整个营销学科看,营销学科的核心知识单元构成了一个紧密的知识整体,并不存在分裂的状态。
在对高频关键词进行学科编码及专业编码的基础上,发现学科层面上营销学科的主要关联学科包括经济学、管理学、心理学、一般商业、金融学、社会学等学科,管理学知识与营销学科知识有较大程度的关联,这一点与期刊网络的分析是相同的。从专业层面看,营销学科中最引人注目的研究领域是品牌、产品以及消费者行为的研究,但是最具中心性的研究是营销战略、服务营销和销售管理的研究。在具体到研究方向上,新产品、营销战略、服务与顾客关系的研究、品牌延伸的研究、市场导向的研究是最突出的方向。关于产品与消费者的研究关系密切,而关于顾客与服务的研究关系密切。从研究的倾向看,营销研究侧重于对变量间的互相影响研究,而不是基于建模的方式。
第三部分包括两章内容。第七章是关于国内营销研究主题变化的分析。通过对国内营销研究三十年主题变化分析,发现在国内营销研究上,既存在与国际接轨的趋势又保留着自己的特色。国内学者在学习国外营销学时往往受到当时国际上主流研究的影响,一些刚刚兴起的研究热点被及时地引进到国内,比如服务营销、国际营销、内部营销、市场定位等领域。不过,这些研究领域能否在国内得到发展,与国情需要有关。这些关于本国营销学科研究发展的趋势有助于我们规划未来的研究方向。
第八章对本研究进行总结并展望未来。总的来说,从多个角度得出的结果可以帮助营销学界更新对整体营销学科研究与学科知识的认识。不管是从期刊角度、作者合著角度还是从知识网络角度,结果都表明营销学科处于成熟的发展阶段,没有迹象表明营销学科知识存在分裂。关于营销学科知识来源,修正了营销学界一直将心理学和经济学视为营销学科最重要的两大影响来源,研究结果表明,管理学研究对营销学的影响要大于心理学和经济学。本文最后还对研究中存在问题进行探讨,并从国际和国内两个方面展望营销学科的发展以及营销学者的努力方向。
The development of marketing discipline has a history of more than a century years, but the scientific research on marketing only has a history of fifty years. The discipline of Marketing had been developed based on the discipline of economics, and the scientific research schema of marketing has been considered deep impacted by the discipline of psychology. In more than fifty years of scientific research, it has been evaluated continuously by marketing scholars holding a positive and confirmed viewpoint to track the developing situation and trend of researches. However, with the continuous expansion of the research participators and the growing research outputs, it has become increasingly difficult to get to know the state of the development through the traditional methods of reading the published marketing literature carefully. Begin at the twenty-first century, along with the more and more expanded international marketing academia, negative and critical voices have appeared as one falls another rises, scholars from Europe and Australia had criticized that the academic marketing research was not international enough, and scholars from the United States had considered the marketing academic research was currently gone into division and decline. Despite the critical voices, what is the whole status of marketing academic researches was rarely showed, this study try to explore the status quo and development trend of overall marketing academic research and answer the doubts from academia and find the direction for the future.
The method of Scientometrics was used to probe the comprehensive knowledge of marketing discipline. The marketing journals, the marketing researchers and the marketing knowledge were analyzed, results were showed by Visualizing Techniques, the whole status and the trend of researches were made out by the mapping of marketing Knowledge, it help to understand the outlook of the discipline and the direction of development could be better comprehended.
The innovation was reflected in the research scopes, multi-angle of the study and new tools used. The main work involved four aspects:(1) looking at the comprehensive status of marketing disciplines from the vertical and horizontal viewing angles; (2) Evaluating marketing journals, authors and knowledge unit based on social network analysis (3) Validating the state of marketing discipline by different theoretical models (4) Analyzing the trends of domestic marketing academic research in three decades.
The dissertation can be divided into three parts, the first part consists of three chapters, in addition to the introduction chapter, and two chapters were contributed on the history of marketing and the scientometric methods respectively. In chapter 2, the marketing history was briefly introduced, the development stages and perspective of marketing thought was mentioned, they would be compared with the final results to show what had changed, and would be the basis of the interpretation of final results. In chapter 3, the principles and methods of Scientometrics and Visualizing Techniques were introduced, the advantages and disadvantages of their application were also mentioned, those introductions would be necessary for the better understanding and accurate interpretation of the results.
The second part is the focus of this dissertation, it also consists of three chapters, explored the overall development trend of marketing disciplines from marketing journal network, co-author network and knowledge network respectively. In chapter 4, the status of marketing discipline was tracked from marketing journals. Sixty-eight continuously published marketing journals were chose for the study, the network of marketing journals was constructed by the citation relations between journals, core journals would show off in the network, the citation relations between journals from different disciplines would tell the knowledge flow direction between disciplines, it could be a sign for the judging of maturity status of the marketing discipline. Results showed that, of the sixty-eight marketing journals,17 journals could be chose as the core journals, and marketing journals were most closely related to management journals, second was psychological journals and third was economic journals, several marketing journals can be seen as the flagship journals of the discipline of marketing, these journals include Journal of Marketing, Journal Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing Research, and Marketing Science. It could be determined that the marketing discipline was already in a maturity status from the journals network relations. It also founded that marketing journals can be divided into five categories.
The network of marketing journals can also be used as a ranking of journals by the indices of network centrality, in contrast with the traditional journal evaluation methods, it could be more objective and stable. Traditional journal ranking often compute by surveyed data, it was more easily influenced by many factors, such as organizations with different goals, agencies of different sizes, and the personal characteristics of interviewee, thus the results could be more subjective. Even a lot of marketing journals rankings had a certain consensus on the top marketing journals; it had more varied outside the recognized top ranking journals. Although simple ranking based on the comparison of the number of citations can be objective, but the results are prone to be manipulated, ranking based on the social networks of citation relations of journals can be objective and more stable.
In chapter 5, the trends of the academic research development were tracked by research collaboration. Co-authorship of the three flagship journals of marketing disciplines was analyzed to show the Invisible College of marketing disciplines. The relations between research collaboration and research output, between research collaboration and output quality, were explored. The results showed that, cooperation between researchers is increasingly closer, more and more frequent, the scale of collaboration is also increasing. Whether or not cooperation was found to be significant correlation with the frequencies of cited, which was even more clear in the short-term, but the frequencies of cited which is often choose as the index of research quality was not found to be significantly affect by the number of author in cooperation. Four stages of co-author networks was showed that the marketing discipline is becoming more and more uniform and maturity, rather than gradually split recession, this is consistent with the conclusion made by citation analysis of marketing journals.
Three levels of research collaboration in marketing academic were also analyzed. At the level of State, United States as the birthplace of marketing discipline was the first well-deserved, according to the evaluation of network centrality, Netherland's influence in the marketing discipline was greater than that of Canada. China also had a good performance,. Germany, France, Britain were in the top list of marketing academic research performance too. At the level of institutions, the last decade of high-yield institution was the University of Pennsylvania; Duke University was in the second place, Northwestern University in third place. Established research base of marketing was the most influent player, but research-oriented universities and institutions located in developed areas also had competitive edges. At the level of individual author, the output of authors were less stable than that of institutions, the top list of researchers changed dramatically comparing the output of one decade with the output of three decades.
In chapter 6, the research topics were analyzed to help comprehending in depth into the specific knowledge and the structure of the knowledge. Word frequency analysis was used to detect the marketing research hot topics, co-occurrence networks were constructed at three levels to reveal the marketing knowledge network. The results showed that, hot research topics in the marketing discipline were consumer behavior, brand management, relationship marketing, product management, service marketing, advertising and marketing strategies, the network of those hot topics as the core knowledge of marketing discipline composed an overall tight body of knowledge.
High-frequency words were coded according to different discipline and different marketing specialization, and networks were formed to show the relationship between disciplines and specializations. At the discipline network, marketing mainly related with management, psychology, economics, finance, sociology and general business, management discipline was closest with marketing discipline, this was also show in the journals network. At the specialization network, the more compelling research areas were brand, product, and consumer behavior research, but according to network centrality indices, marketing strategy, service marketing and sales management were the more central areas. At the research direction network, new product, marketing strategies, services and customer relationships, brand extension research, market-oriented research was the more prominent direction research area. The research design of marketing was more focused on the interaction between variables, rather than model-based approach.
The third part consists two chapters. In chapter 7, domestic marketing academic research was analyzed. Results showed that, although domestic research was subject to be impacted by the international research themes, some of the newly emerging research focuses were timely introduced into the domestic marketing academia, such as services marketing, international marketing, internal marketing, market positioning and other fields of research, the domestic marketing research had retained its own characteristics, the research focuses were more related with national context. Those results can be help to the planning of future domestic research.
The final chapter summarized the major conclusions and results. Generally speaking, results from multiple angles could help to update the overall understanding of marketing academic and marketing discipline. Whether from the perspective of journals, co-author network or marketing knowledge framework, the results all indicated that the marketing discipline was in a mature stage of development, there was no division in the body of marketing knowledge. Marketing scholars had traditionally seen the disciplines of psychology and economics as the two most important sources of influence to marketing discipline, the study showed that management recently become the greatest related discipline of marketing. Finally, problems existed had been discussed, and the visions of both international and domestic marketing academia that deserved the researchers' efforts had been provided.
引文
[1]梁立明,武夷山.科学计量学：理论探索与案例研究[M].北京：科学出版社,2006,1-5.
[2]何佳讯,胡颖林.何为经典?品牌科学研究的核心领域与知识结构——基于SSCI数据库(1975-2008)的科学计量分析.营销科学学报[J].2010,6：111-136.
[3]Malhotra,N.K. Some observations on the state of the art in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science[J],1988,16:4-24.
[4]Malhotra,N.K., Wu,L.,& Whitelock,L. An overview of the first 21 years of research in the International Marketing Review:1983-2003. International Marketing Review[J],2005,22:391-398.
[5]Hult,G.T.M., Neese,W.T.& Bashaw,R.E. Faculty perceptions of marketing journals. Journal of Marketing Education[J],1997,19:37-53.
[6]Theoharakis,V.,& Hirst,A. Perceptual differences of marketing journals:A worldwide perspective. Marketing Letters[J],2002,13:389-402.
[7]Baumgartner,H.& Pieters,R. The structural influence of marketing journals:A citation analysis of the discipline and its subareas over time. Journal of Marketing[J], 2003,67:123-139.
[8]Polonsky,M.J.& Whitelaw,P. What are we measuring when we evaluate journals? Journal of Marketing Education[J],2005,27:189-201.
[9]Svensson,G.H., Slatten,T.& Tronvoll,B-Scientific identity of "top" research journals in the broader discipline of marketing------Findings and queries, European business Review[J],2009,20:384-400.
[10]Bakir,A., Vitell,S.J.& Rose,G.M. Publications in major marketing journals:An analysis of scholars and marketing departments. Journal of Marketing Education[J], 2000,22:99-107.
[11]Rosenstreich,D.& Wooliscroft,B. How international are the top academic journals? The case of marketing, European Business Review[J],2006,8:422-436.
[12]Ngai,E.W.T, Internet Marketing Research(1987-2000):A literature review and classification. European Journal of Marketing[J],2003,37:24-49.
[13]Goldman,A.& Grinstein,A. Stages in the development of market orientation publication activity——A longitudinal assessment, European Journal of Marketing[J], 2009,44:1384-1409.
[14]Das, K. Relationship Marketing Research (1994-2006):An academic literature review and classification. Marketing Intelligence & Planning[J],2009,27:326-363.
[15]李伟伟,卢泰宏.过去十年消费者行为研究回顾——基于Journal of Consumer Research出版论文的分析.现代管理科学[J],2008,(6)：34-36.
[16]黄速建,黄群慧,张蒽,钟宏武,焦淑艳,朱昊伟.中国市场营销学研究的现状分析——基于文献计量的研究.学习与探索[J],2007,(1)：161-165.
[17]李东进,王大海.中国大陆营销研究现状及发展趋势——基于JMS中国营销科学学术会议论文集的内容分析.营销科学学报[J],2008,4：107-121.
[18]Savitt,R. Historical research in marketing.Journal of Marketing[J],1980,44: 52-58.
[19]郭国庆.营销理论发展史[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2009,48-53.
[20]理查德·泰德勒著,王荔等译.零售营销——变化中的实战对策[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007,2-7.
[21]Jone,D.G.& Shaw,E. A history of marketing thought, in B.A.Weitz and R.Wensley (eds) Handbook of Marketing[M]. London:Sage publication,2002,39-65.
[22]Wilkie,W.& Moore,E. Scholarly research in marketing: Exploring the foureras of thought development. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing[J],2003,22:116-146.
[23]Shaw,E.& Jone,D.G. A history of schools of marketing thought. Marketing Theory[J],2005,5:239-281.
[24]Hollander,S.C., Keep,W.W.& Dickinson,R. Marketing public policy and the evolving role of marketing academics:A historical perspective. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing[J],1999,18(2):265-269.
[25]Wilkie,W.& Moore,E. Marketing's contributions to society. Journal of Marketing[J],1999,63:198-218.
[26]Cross,G.S. An all-consuming century:why commercialism won in modern America[M]. New York:Columbia University Press,2000,5-9.
[27]Bussiere,D. Evidence of a marketing periodic literature within the American Economic Association:1895-1936. Journal of Macromarketing[J],2000,20:137-143.
[28]Kerin,R.A. In pursuit of an ideal: the editorial and literary history of the Journal of Marketing. Journal of Marketing[J],1996,60:1-13.
[29]丹尼尔·A·雷恩著,孙健敏等译.管理思想史(第五版)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2009,241-257.
[30]彼得·德鲁克著,齐若兰译.管理的实践[M].北京：机械工业出版社,2006,28-39.
[31]Bagozzi,R.P. Marketing as Exchange. Journal of Marketing[J],1975,39:32-39.
[32]于洪彦,刘金星.AMA官方营销定义动态演化及其启示探析.外国经济与管理[J],2010,32(3)：33-38.
[33]Gundlach,G.& Wilkie,W. The American Marketing Association's new definition of Marketing:perspective and commentary on the 2007 revision. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing[J],2009,28:259-264.
[34]Harzing,A.W. Working with ISI data:beware of categorisation problems[Z]. Retrieved 2010-12-30 from http://www.harzing.com/ISI_categories.htm.
[35]杨志勇.“管理辨析”.管理学报[J],2010,7(9)：1277-1281.
[36]Morrison,D.G. Founding Marketing Science. Marketing Science[J],2001,20(4): 357-359.
[37]袁军鹏.科学计量学高级教程[M].北京：科学技术文献出版社,2010,1-7.
[38]赵红州,蒋国华.科学计量学的历史与现状.科学学研究[J],1984,2(4)：24-35.
[39]蒋国华.科学计量学：今天和明天.科学学与科学技术管理[J],1997,18(7)：26-29.
[40]邱均平.文献信息作者分布规律——洛特卡定律.情报理论与实践[J],2000,23(6)：475-478.
[41]邱均平.文献信息离散分布规律——布拉德福定律.情报理论与实践[J],2000,23(4)：315-320.
[42]邱均平.文献信息词频分布规律——齐普大定律.情报理论与实践[J],2000,23(5)：397-400.
[43]候海燕.科学计量学知识图谱[M].大连：大连理工大学出版社,2008,12-16.
[44]Schubert,A. The web of Scientometrics:A staistical overview of the first 50 volumes of the journal. Scientometrics[J],2002,53(1):3-20.
[45]Hood,W.W.& C.S. Wilson. The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics[J],2001,52(2):291-314.
[46]Small,H.& Griffith,B.C. The structure of scientific literatures I:indentifying and graphing specialties. Science Studies[J],1974,4:17-40.
[47]Griffith,B., Small,H.G, Stonehill,J.A.& Dey,S. The structure of scientif Literatures:toward a macro-and micrstructure for science. Science Studies[J],1974, 4:339-365.
[48]Chen,C. CiteSpace Ⅱ: detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology[J],2006,57(3):359-377.
[49]Kessler,M.M. Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation[J],1963,14(1),10-25.
[50]林顿·弗里曼著,张文宏等译.社会网络分析发展史[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008,1-11.
[51]Wolfe,A.W. The rise of network thinking in anthropology. Social Networks[J], 1978,1:53-64.
[52]罗家德.社会网络分析(第二版)[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2010,187-226.
[53]耿学华,傅德胜.可视化数据挖掘技术研究.计算机应用与软件[J],2006,23(2)：85-87.
[54]陈云伟,Katy Borner.论科学地图的科学价值.图书·情报·知识[J],2009,(6)：27-33.
[55]Deighton,J. A. The territory of consumer research: walking the fences. Journal of Consumer Research[J],2007,34(3):279-282.
[56]Morrison,D.G. Founding Marketing Science. Marketing Science[J],2001,20(4): 357-359.
[57]Hofacker,C.F., Gleim,M.R.& Lawson,S.J. Revealed reader preference for marketing journals. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science[J],2009,37(2), 238-247.
[58]Wilkie,W.L.& Moore,E.S. Scholarly research in marketing:exploring the '4Eras' of thought development. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing[J],2003,22:116-46.
[59]Baumgartner,H.& Pieters,R. The structural influence of marketing journals:A citation analysis of the discipline and its sub-areas over time. Journal of Marketing[J], 2003,67(2),123-139.
[60]Alexander,J.C.Jr.& Mabry,R.H. Relative significance of journals, authors, and articles cited in financial research. Journal of Finance[J],1994,49:697-712.
[61]McAlister,L. Unleashing potential. Journal of Marketing[J],2005,69(4):16-17.
[62]Becker,B.W.& Browne, W.G. Perceived quality of marketing journals. Journal of marketing education[J],1979,1:6-15.
[63]Coe,R.K.& Weinstock,I. Evaluating journal publications of marketing professors: A second look. Journal of Marketing Education[J],1983,5:37-42.
[64]Fry,E.H., Walters,C.G.& Scheuermann,L.E. Perceived quality of fifty selected journals:academicians and practitioners. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science[J],1985,13(2):352-361.
[65]Luke,R.H.& Doke,R.E. Marketing journal hierarchies and faculty perceptions, 1986-1987. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science[J],1987,15(1):74-78.
[66]Polonsky,M.J.& Walker,D.S. Marketing journals and Asia-Pacific marketing academics. Asia-Australia Marketing Journal[J],1993,(1):61-69.
[67]Hult,G.T.M., William,T.N.& Bashaw,R.E. Faculty perceptions of marketing journals. Journal of Marketing Education[J],1997,19(1):37-52.
[68]Koojaroenprasit,N., Weinstein,A., Johnson,W.C.& Remington,D.O. Marketing journal rankings revisited:research findings and academic implications. Marketing Education Review[J],1998,8(1):95-102.
[69]Theoharakis,V.& Hirst,A. Perceptual differences of marketing journals:A worldwide perspective. Marketing Letters[J],2002,13(4):398-402.
[70]Mort,G.S., McColl-Kennedy,J.R., Kiel,G.& Soutar,G.N. Australian and New Zealand senior academics' perceptions of marketing journals. Australasian Marketing Journal[J],2004,12(2):51-61.
[71]Polonsky,M.J.& Whitelaw,P. A multi-dimensional examination of marketing journals by north American academics. Marketing Education Review[J],2006.16(3): 59-72.
[72]Hult,G.T.M., Reimann,M.& Schilke,O. Worldwide faculty perceptions of marketing journals:rankings, trends, comparisons, and segmentations. Global Edge Business Review[J],2009,3(3):1-23.
[73]Polonsky,M.J.& Whitelaw,P. What are we measuring when we evaluate journals? Journal of Marketing Education[J],2005,27(2):189-201.
[74]Guidry,J.A., Brandi,N., Guidry,H., Linda,J., John,R.T.& Christiane,V. Surveying the cites:A ranking of marketing journals using citation analysis, Marketing Education Review[J],2004,14(1):45-59.
[75]Coe,R.K.& Weinstock,I. Evaluating journal publication:perceptions versus reality. AACSB Bulletin,1969,(1),23-37.
[76]Liebowitz,S.J.& Palmer,J.P. Assessing the relative impacts of economics journals. Journal of Economic Literature,1984,22(3):77-88.
[77]Jobber,D.& Simpson,P. A citation analysis of selected marketing journals. International Journal of Research in Marketing[J],1988,5(2):137-142.
[78]Pecotich,A.& Everett,J.E. An extension of the citation analysis of selected marketing journals. International Journal of Research in Marketing[J],1989,6(3): 199-204.
[79]Zinkhan,GM.& Leigh,T.W. Assessing the quality ranking of the Journal of Advertising:1986-1997. Journal of Advertising[J],1999,28(2):51-70.
[80]Bakir,A., Vitell,S.J.& Rose,G.M. Publications in major marketing journals: An analysis of scholars and marketing departments. Journal of Marketing Education[J], 2000,22(2):99-107.
[81]Moussa,S.& Touzani,M. Ranking marketing journals using the Google Scholar-based hg-index. Journal of Informetrics[J],2010,4:107-117.
[82]Polonsky,M.J., Jones,G.& Kearsley,M.J. Accessibility: An alternative method of ranking marketing journals. Journal of Marketing Education[J],1999,21(3):181-193.
[83]Bauerly,R.J.& Johnson,D.T. An evaluation of journals used in doctoral marketing programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science[J],2005,33(3): 313-329.
[84]Yoo,B.Developing an overall ranking of 79 marketing journals: An introduction of PRINQUAL to marketing. Australasian Marketing Journal[J],2009,17:160-174.
[85]Cabell Publishing Inc. (2010). Cabell's directory of publishing opportunities in marketing[Z]. Retrieved 2011-1-20 from http://www.cabells.com.
[86]Harzing, A.W.K. Journal Quality List,37rd ed[Z]. Retrieved 2010-5-29, from http://www. harzing. com.
[87]Knight,G.A., Hult,G.T.M.& Bashaw, R.E. Research productivity in the journal of business research:1985-1999. Journal of Business Research[J],2000,49:303-314.
[88]Hirsch,J.E. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of United States of America[J], 2005,102:16569-16572.
[89]Ball,P. Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature,2005,436:900.
[90]Bornmann,L.& Daniel,H.D. Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?Scientometrics[J],2005,65(3):391-392.
[91]Egghe,L. Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics[J],2006,69(1):131-152.
[92]Schubert,A.& Glanzel,W. A systematic analysis of Hirsch-type indices for journals. Journal of Informetrics[J],2007,(1):179-256.
[93]Vanclay,J.K. On the robustness of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology[J],2007,58(10):1547-1550.
[94]Garfield,E. Citation indexes for science:A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science[J],1955,122(3159):108-111.
[95]Bar-Ilan,J. Which h-index?—A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics[J],2008,74(2):257-271.
[96]Saad,G. Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholars and business-related journals respectively. Scientometrics[J],2006,69(1):117-120.
[97]Uslay,C., Morgan,R.E.& Sheth,J.N. Peter Drucker on marketing: An exploration of five tenets. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science[J],2009,37(1):47-60.
[98]Saad, G. Applying the h-index in exploring bibliometric properties of elite marketing scholars. Scientometrics[J].2010,83(2):423-433.
[99]Redman,A.L., Manakyan,H.& Tanner,J.R. A normalized citation analysis of real estate journals. Real Estate Economics[J],1999,27(Spring):169-182.
[100]Colquitt,L.L. Relative significance of insurance and actuarial journals and articles:A citation analysis. Journal of Risk & Insurance[J],1997,62:505-528.
[101]Ramsay,I.M.& Stapledon,G.P. The influence of commercial law journals: citation analysis, Australian Business Law Review[J],1998,26(August):298-303.
[102]Kotler,P. A generic concept of Marketing. Journal of Marketing,1972,36(2): 46-54.
[103]方文.社会心理学的演化：一种学科制度视角.中国社会科学[J],2001,(6)：126-135.
[104]刘珺珺.科学社会学(第二版).上海：上海科技教育出版社,2007,135-156.
[105]Zuckerman,H.A. Patterns of name ordering among authors of scientific papers: A study of social symbolism and its ambiguity.The American Journal of Sociology[J], 1968,74(3):276-291.
[106]Glanzel,W.& Czerwon,H.J. A new methodological approach to bibliographic coupling and its application to the national, regional and institutional level. Scientometrics[J],1996,37(2):195-221.
[107]刘云,常青.中国基础研究国际合作的科学计量测度与评价.管理科学学报[J],2001,4(1)：64-74.
[108]Hudson,J. Trends in multi-authored papers in economics,The Journal of Economic Perspectives[J],1996,10(3):153-158.
[109]Beaver,D.D.& Rosen,R. Studies in scientific collaboration-Part Ⅰ. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship.Scientometrics[J],1978,1(1):65-84.
[110]Beaver, D.D.& Rosen,R. Studies in scientific collaboration Part III. Professionalization and the natural history of modern scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics[J],1979b,1(3):231-245.
[111]Heck,J.L.& Zaleski,P.A. Trends in economic-journal literature:1969-89. Atlantic Economic Journal[J],1991,19(4):27-32.
[112]Katz,J.S. Geographical proximity and scientific collaboration.Scientometrics[J], 1994,31(1):31-43.
[113]Liang,L.& Zhu,L. Major factors affecting China's inter-regional research collaboration: Regional scientific productivity and geographical proximity. Scientometrics[J],2002,55(2):287-316.
[114]Duque,R.B., Ynalvez,M., Sooryamoorthy,R.& Mbatia,P. Collaboration paradox: Scientific productivity, the Internet, and problems of research in developing areas. Social Studies of Science[J],2005,35(5):755-785.
[115]Liang,L., Kretschmer,H., Guo,Y.& Beaver,D.D. Age structures of scientific collaboration in Chinese computer science. Scientometrics[J],2001,52(3):471-486.
[116]Maia,M.F.S.& Caregnato,S.E. Co-authorship as an indicator of scientific collaboration network,Perspectivas em Ciencia da Informacao,2008,13(2).
[117]Beaver,D.D.& Rosen,R., Studies in scientific collaboration-Part Ⅱ. Scientific co-authorship, research productivity and visibility in the French scientific elite, 1799-1830. Scientometrics[J],1979a,1(2):133-149.
[118]Gordon,M.D. A critical reassessment of inferred relations between multiple authorship, scientific collaboration, the production of papers and their acceptance for publication. Scientometrics[J],1980,2(3):193-201.
[119]Bordons,M., Garcia-Jover,F.& Barrigon,S. Is collaboration improving research visibility? Spanish scientific output in pharmacology and pharmacy. Research Evaluation[J],1993,3(1):19-24.
[120]Figg,W.D., Dunn,L., Liewehr,D.J., Steinberg,S.M.& Thurman,P.W. Scientific collaboration results in higher citation rates of published articles. Pharmacotherapy 2006,26(6):759-767.
[121]Avkiran,N.K. Scientific collaboration in finance does not lead to better quality research. Scientometrics[J],1997,39(2):173-184.
[122]Leimu,R.& Koricheva,J. Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? BioScience[J],2005,55(5):438-443.
[123]Lee,S.& Bozeman,B. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science[J],2005,35(5):673-702.
[124]Godin,B.& Ippersiel,M.P. Scientific collaboration at the regional level:The case of a small country. Scientometrics[J],1996,36(1):59-68.
[125]Bordons,M., Gomez,I., Fernandez,M.T., Zulueta,M.A.& Mendez,A. Local, domestic and international scientific collaboration in biomedical research. Scientometrics[J],1996,37(2):279-295.
[126]Bozeman,B.& Corley,E. Scientists' collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy[J],2004,33(4):599-616.
[127]Newman,M.E.J. The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America[J],2001a,98(2): 404-409.
[128]Newman,M.E.J. Scientific collaboration networks.I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review E-Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics[J],2001b,64(1):016131/1-016131/8.
[129]Newman,M.E.J. Scientific collaboration networks.II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. Physical Review E-Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics[J],2001c,64(1):016132/1-016132/7.
[130]Barabasi,A.L., Jeong,H., Ravasz,E., Neda,Z., Schuberts,A.& Vicsek,T. Evolution of the social network of scientificcollaborations. Physica A[J],2002,311(3): 590-614.
[131]Bettencourt,L.M.A., Kaiser,D.I.& Kaur,J. Scientific discovery and topological transitions in collaboration networks. Journal of Informetrics[J],2009,3(3):210-221.
[132]Clark,G.L. Productivity ratings of institutions based on publication in eight marketing journals:1983-1984. Journal of Marketing Education[J],1985,7(3):12-23.
[133]Fields,D.M.& Swayne,L.E. Publication in major marketing journals:1960-1986. Journal of Marketing Education[J],1988,10(3):36-48.
[134]Niemi,A.W. Publication performance of marketing departments,1975-1985. Journal of Marketing Education[J],1988,10:8-12.
[135]Svensson,G. Ethnocentricity in top marketing journals. Marketing Intelligence & Planning[J],2005,23(5):244-234.
[136]Stremersch,S.& Verhoef,P.C. Globalization of authorship in the marketing discipline:Does it help or hinder the field? Marketing Science[J],2005,24:585-594.
[137]Wilkie.W.L & Moore,E.S. Scholarly research in marketing:Exploring "4 Eras" of thought development. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing[J],2003,22 (2):116-146.
[138]Ford,J.B., Latour,M.S.& Henthorne,T.L. Author and institution productivity in Industrial Marketing Management from 1971 to 1998. Industrial Marketing Management[J],2001,30(5):441-452.
[139]Moncrief,W.C, Marshall,G.W.& Watkins,C. Tracking academic research in selling and sales management:Authors, authorships, academic institutions and journals. The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management[J],2000,20(2):99-108.
[140]Henthorne,T.L., LaTour,M.S.& Loraas,T. Publication productivity in three leading U.S. advertising journals:1989 through 1996. Journal of Advertising[J],1998, 27(2):53-63.
[141]Hanna,J.B.& LaTour,M.S. Building bridges through logistics publication: Author and institution productivity in businesses'most applied science. American Business Review[J],2002,20(1):43-49.
[142]Cheng,L.T.W., Chan,K.C.& Chan,R.Y.K. Publications in major marketing journals:An analysis of research productivity of Asia-Pacific universities. Journal of Marketing Education[J],2003,25(2):163-176.
[143]Polonsky,M., Mittelstaedt,J.D.& Moore,J.N. Benchmarking publishing activity of U.S. colleges and universities across the leading journals:a grouped evaluation. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education[J],2008,12(summer):19-31.
[144]West,D., Ford,J.B., Magnini,V.P., LaTour,M.S.& Polonsky,M. A backward glance of who and what marketing scholars have been researching:1977-2002.Review of marketing reseach[J],2010,7:1-18.
[145]Barry,T.E. Publication productivity in the three leading U.S. advertising journals: Inaugural Issues Through 1988. Journal of Advertising[J],1990,19(1):52-60.
[146]Seggie,S.H.& Griffith,D.A. What does it take to get promoted in marketing academia? Understanding exceptional publication productivity in the leading marketing journals. Journal of Marketing[J],2009,73(1):122-132.
[147]Pasadeos,Y., Phelps,J.& Kim,B.H. Disciplinary impact of advertising scholars: Temporal comparisons of influential authors, works and research networks. Journal of Advertising[J],1998,27(4):53-69.
[148]Rosenstreich,D.& Wooliscroft,B. How international are the top academic journals? The case of marketing. European Business Review[J],2006,18(6):422-436.
[149]Carter,C.R., Leuschner,R.& Rogers,D.S. A social network analysis of the journal of supply chain management:Knowledge generation, knowledge diffusion and thought leadership. The Journal of Supply Chain Management[J],2007,43(2): 15-28.
[150]Goldenberg,J., Libai,B., Muller,E.& Stremersch,S. The evolving social network of marketing scholars. Marketing Science[J],2010,29(3):561-567.
[151]昌家立.知识本质与知识形态新探——兼论几种知识的界定.求是学刊[J],1995,(4)：10-14.
[152]卡尔·波普尔著,查汝强等译.科学发现的逻辑.杭州：中国美术学院出版社,2007,13-15.
[153]宣勇,凌健.“学科”考辨.高等教育研究[J],2006,27(4)：18-23.
[154]陈洪澜.论知识分类的十大方式.科学学研究,2007,25(1)：26-31.
[155]严康敏.知识分类反映科学体系发展趋势中的问题.图书馆论坛[J],1996,(2)：73-74.
[156]谭镜星,曾阳素,陈梦迁.从学科到学科群：知识分类体系和知识政策的视角.高等教育研究[J],2007,28(7)：31-36.
[157]Tolman,E.C. Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review[J],1948,55 (4):189-208.
[158]Collins,A.M.& Quillian,M.R. Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior[J],1969,8(2):240-247.
[159]Collins,A.M.& Loftus,E.F. A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review[J],1975,82(6):407-428.
[160]Brookes,B.C. The foundations of information science.Part III:quantitative aspects:objective maps and subjective landscapes. Journal of Information Science[J], 1980,2 (6):269-275.
[161]Garfield,E. Scientography:Mapping the tracks of science. Current Contents: Social & Behavioural Sciences[J],1994,7(10):45-52.
[162]Brennemann,W.B., Keys,J.B.& Fulmer,R.M. Learning across a living company: the shell companies'experiences.Organization Dynamics[J],1998,27(2):61-70.
[163]郝云宏,李文博.国外知识网络的研究及其新进展.浙江工商大学学报[J],2007,(6)：70-75.
[164]赵蓉英,邱均平.知识网络的类型学探究.图书情报工作[J],2007,(9)：11-15.
[165]刘向,马费成,陈潇俊,陈柏彤,贾茜.知识网络的结构与演化——概念与理论进展.情报科学[J],2011,29(6)：801-809.
[166]Callon,M., Courtial,J.-P., Turner,W.A.& Bauin,S. From translations to problematic networks:An introduction to coword analysis. Social Science Information[J],1983,22:191-235.
[167]王晓光.科学知识网络的形成与演化化(Ⅱ)：共词网络可视化与增长动力学.情报学报[J],2010,29(2)：314-322.
[168]Leydesdorff,L. Why words and co-words cannot map the development of the sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science[J],1997,48 (5):418-427.
[169]Courtial,J.P. Comments on Leydesdorff's article[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science[J],1998,49(l):98-98.
[170]Leydesdorff,L. Reply about using co-words. Journal of the American Society for Information Science[J],1998,49(1):99-99.
[171]He,Q. Knowledge discovery through co-word analysis. Library Trends[J],1999, 48(1):133-159.
[172]魏瑞斌.基于关键词的情报学研究主题分析.情报科学[J],2006,24(9)：1400-1404.
[173]Ercan,G.& Cicekli,I. Using lexical chains for keyword extraction. Information Processing and Management,2007,43:1705-1714.
[174]王晓光.科学知识网络的形成与演化(Ⅰ)：共词网络方法的提出.情报学报[J],2009,28(4)：599-605.
[175]Garfield,E.Keywords Plus:ISI's breakthrough retrieval method. Current Contents[J],1990,13:295-299.
[176]Garfield,E.& Sher,I.H. Keywords Plus—Algorithmic derivative indexing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science[J],1993,4.4(5):298-299.
[177]Hunt,S.D. The nature and scope of marketing. Journal of Marketing[J],1976,40 (3):17-26.
[178]Walter,G Marketing abstracts. Journal of Marketing[J],1981,45:146-159.
[179]Speck,P. Marketing literature review. Journal of Marketing[J],1986,50:107-120.
[180]Leonard,M. Marketing literature review.Journal of Marketing[J],2003,67:116-128.
[181]Day,G.S.& Montgomery,D.B. Charting new directions for marketing. Journal of Marketing[J],1999,63(Special Issue):3-13.
[182]Srivastava,R.K., Shervani,T.A.& Fahey,L. Marketing, business processes,and shareholder value:An organizationaly embedded view of marketing activities and the discipline of marketing. Journal of Marketing[J],1999,63(special Issue):168-179.
[183]Achrol,R.S.& Kotler,P. Marketing in the network economy. Journal of Marketing[J],1999,63(Special Issue):146-163.
[184]Moorman,C.& Rust,R.T. The role of marketing. Journal of Marketing[J],1999, 63(Special Issue):180-197.
[185]Smith,K.J.& Muller,H.R. The ethics of publisher incentives in the marketing textbook selection decision. Journal of Marketing Education[J],1998,20(3):258-267.
[186]何佳讯,罗雯.西方营销学体系的新变化.国际商务研究[J],2003,(6)：7-10.
[187]费明胜.营销管理理论的演变与发展——基于菲利普·科特勒《营销管理》中文各版本的比较研究.经济管理[J],2006,20：40-48.
[188]Kotler,P.& Keller,K.L. Marketing management 14e)[M].Upper Saddle River, New York:Prentice Hall,2011.
[189]Perreault,W.D., Cannon,J.P.& McCarthy,E.J. Basic marketing:a marketing strategy planning approach(18e)[M]. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin,2011.
[190]Malhotra,N.K. The impact of the Academy of Marketing Science on marketing scholarship:An analysis of the research published in JAMS. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science[J],1996,24(4):291-298.
[191]Green,P.E., Johnson,R.M.& Neal,W.D. The Journal of Marketing Research: Its initiation, growth, and knowledge dissemination. Journal of Marketing Research[J], 2003,40(1):1-9.
[192]Malhotra,N.K., Wu,L.& Whitelock,J. An overview of the first 21 years of research in the International Marketing Review:1983-2003. International Marketing Review[J],2005,22(4):391-398.
[193]Pilkington,A.& Chai,K-H. Research themes, concepts and relationships:A study of International Journal of Service Industry Management (1990-2005). International Journal of Service Industry Management [J],2008,19(1):83-110.
[194]West,D., Ford,J.B., Magnini,V.P., LaTour,M.S.& Polonsky,M. A backward glance of who and what marketing scholars have been researching: 1977-2002.Review of marketing reseach[J],2010,7:1-18.
[195]Fisk,P.R., Brown,S.W.& Bitner,M. Tracking the evolution of the services marketing literature. Journal of Retailing[J],1993,69(1):61-103.
[196]田志龙,戴鑫,戴黎,樊帅.服务营销研究的热点与发展趋势.管理学报[J],2005,2(2)：218-228.
[197]Nill,A.& Schibrowsky,J.A. Research on marketing ethics:A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Macromarketing[J],2007,27(3):256-273.
[198]Ngai,E.W.T. Internet marketing research (1987-2000):a literature review and classification. European Journal of Marketing[J],2003,37(1/2):24-49.
[199]Schibrowsky,J.A., Peltier,J.W.& Nill,A. The state of internet marketing research: A review of the literature and future research directions. European Journal of Marketing[J],2007,41(7/8):722-733.
[200]Kevork,E.K.& Vrechopoulos,A.P. CRM literature:conceptual and functional insights by keyword analysis. Marketing Intelligence & Planning[J],2009,27(1): 48-85.
[201]Samiee,S.& Walters,P.G.P. Relationship marketing in an international context:a literature review. International Business Review[J],2003,12(2):193-214.
[202]Das,K. Relationship marketing research (1994-2006):An academic literature review and classification. Marketing Intelligence & Planning,2009,27(3):326-363.
[203]张庚淼.当代市场营销的研究趋势——基于对美、英、法调查结果及优先资助项目的分析.外国经济与管理[J],2005,27(2)：59-65.
[204]Sharma,D., Albers-Miller,N.D., Pelton,L.E.& Straughan,R.D. The impact of image management, self-justification, and escalation of commitment on knowledge development in the marketing discipline. Journal of Marketing Education[J],2006,28 (2):1-11.
[205]Schlee,R.P.& Harich,K.R. Knowledge and skill requirements for marketing jobs in the 21st century. Journal of Marketing Education[J],2010,32(3):341-352.
[206]Chen,C., CiteSpace II:Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology[J],2006,57(3):359-377.
[207]Ouyang,M., Zhou,D.& Zhou,N. Twenty years of research on marketing in China:A review and assessment of journal publications. Journal of Global Marketing [J],2000,14(1/2):187-199.
[208]吴健安.市场营销学在中国的传播.广西商业高等专业学校学报[J],2002,19(3)：33-39.
[209]Hollander.S.C., Rassuli,K.M., Jones,D.GB.& Dix,L.F. Periodization in marketing history. Journal of Macromarketing[J],2005,25(l):32-41.
[210]李飞.中国营销科学30年发展历史回顾.市场营销导刊[J],2009,(2)：4-15.
[211]汤正和.改革开放30年市场营销学在中国传播应用的发展变化.市场营销导刊[J],2008,)3(6)：3-1 0.
[212]何佳讯,卢泰宏.中国营销25年：1979-2003.北京：华夏出版社,2004,412-420.
[213]纪宝成,赵亚平.我国市场营销发展的阶段性分析.商业经济与管理[J],2000,(2)：5-8.
[214]俞满娇.从我国营销学期刊看营销学科状况.河海大学学报(哲学社会科学版)[J],2005,7(2)：17-19.
[215]Babin,B.J.Scholarly marketing publication: the american advantage? European Business Review[J],2008,20(5):370-383.