Over-the-counter (OTC) drugs are an important part of the U.S. healthcare system. According to the Consumer Healthcare Products Association, in 2023, OTC medicine was a $43 billion business, and an average American household spends about $645 annually on OTC products (based on 2022 statistics). OTC medicines have benefited consumers in many ways, including making it easy to treat minor or temporary conditions and avoiding missing work, school, or other activities. Clearly, OTC drugs play an important role in consumers’ everyday lives. However, it is also critical that OTC drugs are consumed in a safe and effective way, as overdosing may harm consumers and lead to emergency room visits and hospitalizations.

When taking medications that contain acetaminophen (e.g., Tylenol, Excedrin, Mucinex, NyQuil/DayQuil, Robitussin), many consumers do not follow the instructions on the product label, potentially leading to hepatoxicity, or liver damage. Using acetaminophen as a basis, researchers in a Journal of Marketing Research study explore which consumers are likely to deviate from drug label instructions, why they do so, and what effective interventions can be implemented to help consumers better follow the directions. Benefiting from the unique diary data and advanced modeling techniques (including dynamic models of consumer choice, structural modeling, and Bayesian modeling), the authors model the consumption process of drugs and provide answers to these important questions.

This study provides valuable insights for various stakeholders, including consumers, pharmaceutical companies, and policymakers. As consumers, it is important to be aware of what makes us more likely to deviate from drug instructions (e.g., suffering from multiple symptoms, ongoing pain, mental health problems, overconfidence in self-medicating, etc.). It is recommended to be more cautious about the negative effects and risks associated with the drugs consumed for our own benefit. Pharmaceutical companies should deliver better drug instructions that consumers can more easily follow and should provide more consumer education to help develop more favorable drug consumption behaviors. For policymakers, such as the FDA and other organizations responsible for consumer well-being, it is crucial to explore ways to improve consumer awareness of drug ingredients.

Check out this interview with the authors for detailed insights:

Q: Your study identifies multiple label deviations by consumers using acetaminophen. What do you see as the most critical information missing from current labels that might prevent these deviations and how could practitioners incorporate these insights into future label designs?

A: Our paper suggests that, in addition to the current list, the label could emphasize the importance of matching the symptoms with the product. For example, if a consumer has symptoms other than pain, such as sinus issues, they should look for a combo-ingredient product that can treat sinus symptoms. If such a patient selects a single-ingredient acetaminophen product, the sinus symptoms will persist and continue to drive future pain and enhance the odds of label deviation.

Practitioners could incorporate these insights by emphasizing symptom-specific recommendations and designing labels to make acetaminophen ingredients more salient.

Q: What recommendations would you give to each of the stakeholders (including policymakers, e.g., the FDA, pharmaceutical companies, and consumers) on leveraging the insights about the profile of consumers (i.e., their demographics, health conditions, and behavioral markers) who are more likely to deviate from label instructions?

A: For policymakers like the FDA: In product labels:

• Emphasize the importance of matching the symptoms to the medication
• Clearly communicate acetaminophen as an ingredient. After years of policy interventions, this continues to be a struggle; 41% of consumers do not know that the medication they take contains acetaminophen

For pharmaceutical companies:

• Add symptom-match label instructions
• Make the information about acetaminophen as an ingredient clearer
• Educate consumers about the interplay between label deviations and their attitudes toward self-medication, health history (chronic pain, mental health problems), and demographics (women, smokers, heavy drinkers). Target messages to high-risk groups to emphasize the importance of taking the right product at the right time. Feasible platforms could include websites, display ads, and in-person hospital visit instructions

For consumers: As consumers we need:

• To understand that the “too soon” and “too much” label deviations are gateways to the >4g label deviations, the most critical clinical outcome. Therefore, self-managing the process (when and how much medicine to take) at a time when you are fragile because of illness is key
• To select symptom-matching medications and to be disciplined about this can mitigate acetaminophen overdose
• To pay greater attention to knowing the harmful effects of ingredients in the medicines we take; to read labels (vs. popping pills indiscriminately)

Q: The findings of this study are truly impactful and important, considering the consequences of deviating from the recommended drug dosage. The following drug instructions become even more critical when it comes to prescription drugs (in which case, patients’ conditions are more severe or side effects are more serious). Are you working on any projects that extend the findings to prescription drugs? Do you foresee any implications of your study for prescription drugs?

A: The collection of diary data on medicines is extremely difficult and expensive. I can’t emphasize the uniqueness of these data enough. Once you have it, the model and measures we developed can be straightforwardly applied to other contexts. For prescription drugs, these could include opioids, benzodiazepines, stimulants, sleep aids, antidepressants… As you can imagine, the hard thing here would be good quality data for the consumption of prescription drugs. Applications in the OTC space (e.g., ibuprofen, aspirin, dextromethorphan [for cough]), vitamins, nicotine (e.g., vaping), and Epsom salt (sore muscles) are easier to extend.

Q: It is wonderful to see that an increasing number of marketing researchers devote their attention to the healthcare industry, which is a very meaningful sector. Do you see any trends in terms of what topics researchers are working on to provide practical insights for policymakers and consumers/patients? What would be the promising areas to focus on in this field over the next 5 years?

A: The promising areas:

• Why haven’t the label changes worked over the years? Why is consumer knowledge of acetaminophen so poor (despite significant label changes and educational initiatives)? What are the hurdles and how best to overcome them?
• Many people buy branded versions of commoditized OTC drugs which are more expensive. Why is that, and are there nudges that could incentivize consumers to be more rational?
• Can healthcare apps mitigate label deviations? Any other tech-enabled (e.g., LLMs) solutions?
• DTC prescription drug marketing is much more regulated outside of the U.S. What are the implications for consumer welfare? This is a difficult but very important topic to study. 

Q: Did you face unique challenges while studying healthcare or drug-related topics compared to traditional marketing topics? If so, do you have any recommendations for your fellow researchers?

A: There is a good appetite for healthcare-related questions and consumer welfare implications. Therefore, there were no real hurdles in the topical area. The review process was challenging with almost all the questions centered on the methodology. The review process took some time.

Q: The study highlights consumer overconfidence in self-medication as a factor in label deviation. What strategies would you recommend for brands or retailers to balance consumer autonomy with effective guidance discouraging unsafe practices?

A: There is a series of experimental studies that could test a series of hypotheses (promoting overconfidence awareness, seeking second opinion, etc.). I hope that someone will take it on. At a more practical level, an easy intervention is for doctors or nurses to simply remind patients that overdosing comes with the possibility of long-term deleterious effects. Therefore, health care professionals could be very effective.

Q: Given that digital tools are increasingly part of consumer interaction, what specific technological approaches (such as apps, reminders, or digital labels) do you believe would most effectively support safe consumption? How should practitioners prioritize these approaches? What motivated you to pursue this fascinating and impactful research area?

A: Apps, reminders, digital labels, and websites such as https://www.getreliefresponsibly.com/ are all great ideas. My thinking would be to pick those where it’s easy to take an A/B test to assess effectiveness. Here, it’s important to note that label deviations are “tail” behaviors, infrequent, and occur for a small percent of people. This presents a significant challenge in assessing what will move the needle on >4g outcomes.

Three of the four authors (Saul, David, and Neeraj) served on the steering committee for “the acetaminophen behavioral surveillance program” sponsored by McNeil Consumer Healthcare (which makes many OTC drugs, including Tylenol). On this committee, we got to work with researchers with deep medical and policy expertise, so we learned a lot in the process. While Saul and David (both subject matter experts on acetaminophen) wrote several papers in medical journals on the topic, we felt that audiences in marketing and the business world could benefit from what we learned from our work on behavioral surveillance of OTC drugs. We brought methodological rigor to this unique data, which included dynamic models of consumer choice, structural modeling, and Bayesian modeling. Therefore, the intersection of very relatable policy-relevant questions with broad societal impact, done rigorously, was the key motivation.

Source: Min Tian, David W. Kaufman, Saul Shiffman, and Neeraj Arora (2024), “Over-the-Counter Drug Consumption: How Consumers Deviate from Label Instructions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 61 (3), 430–50. doi:10.1177/00222437231199434.

Go to the Journal of Marketing Research

The post How Can Marketers Help Prevent Acetaminophen Overdose? appeared first on American Marketing Association.

Increasing the ecological value of marketing research by examining the interactions among and between business actors, institutions, and systems can help make scholarly marketing research more meaningful and impactful (Van Heerde et al. 2021). Incorporating and integrating multiple stakeholder perspectives and addressing the corresponding trade-offs can strengthen the rigor and relevance of an inquiry, with the potential to enrich outcomes for all stakeholders (e.g., Berry et al. 2024). 

Managers, academics, and policy makers must address social and business challenges against the backdrop of stakeholders’ divergent priorities and perspectives on important issues. Indeed, many of the world’s most pressing topics affect and are affected by multiple stakeholders in areas such as (but not limited to) the infodemics crisis, the need to deliver quality health care and financial services for all, the sustainability of the planet, the ability to effectively leverage technology, unintended consequences of marketing activities, global differences in social/political priorities, and marketing’s role in advancing human rights. Organizations and managers must navigate the needs of multiple stakeholders, including consumers, communities, customers, employees, executives, investors, and society. A stakeholder view, in which the organization focuses on the well-being of a variety of stakeholders in the value chain, can align with an organization’s other longer-term goals, such as profitability (Berry et al. 2024).

We recognize that many real-world problems combine a marketing issue for one stakeholder with financial, human resource, social, cultural, or even moral issues for another stakeholder. This contributes to the richness and ecological validity of research involving multiple stakeholders. As such, we welcome research that takes a multidisciplinary perspective as long as the marketing lens plays a key role in theorizing and analysis.

The special issue is not limited to a particular context, but for illustrative purposes, consider health care as an example. Consumers need affordable, high-quality health care, and communities need equitable health outcomes. A government may prioritize accessible health care for its citizens, while health care providers seek to run a profitable business with a respectable reputation. Insurers need to transparently provide coverage while containing costs. Health care employees require a reasonable workload and fair compensation. Yet, trade-offs exist that limit favorable outcomes for all stakeholders in a health care ecosystem. Given any complex ecosystem, how can marketing explore the needs, decisions, and processes of multiple stakeholders to shed light on the tensions and necessary trade-offs for all stakeholders? What trade-offs are acceptable, and what are the potential impacts of such trade-offs (e.g., positive and negative financial implications, measurable advancements toward societal goals)?

The editorial mission of the Journal of Marketing is to develop and disseminate “knowledge about real-world marketing questions useful to scholars, educators, managers, policy makers, consumers, and other societal stakeholders around the world.” Our empirical research to date has been effective in reflecting typically one or two sets of conventional stakeholder perspectives (e.g., purely consumer- or firm-focused, salesperson–customer dyad-focused).

We introduce a special issue of the Journal of Marketing focused on understanding the challenges and opportunities related to tensions and divergent priorities among multiple stakeholders, including new and relevant stakeholders.

This special issue encourages empirical research and analytical modeling that takes a 360-degree view to include new and relevant stakeholders in the research process, especially work that builds on existing stakeholders while broadening existing lenses via new stakeholder connections. We seek papers that uncover insights into how to deliver economic returns for firms while also delivering broader beneficial contributions on topics such as individual growth and well-being, societal cohesion, firm investment in organizational values, democratic success, and social challenges.

Many business questions involve various stakeholders who may have competing interests. For instance, MacInnis et al. (2020) identify key marketplace stakeholders that influence consumers and customers as including society, media, government and nongovernment organizations, and businesses, among others. As another example, the United Nations recognizes “major groups” of stakeholders as including women, children, and youth; indigenous peoples and their communities; nongovernmental organizations; local authorities; farmers; workers and trade unions; business and industry; and the scientific and technological community (United Nations, n.d.). In marketing, an integrated stakeholder perspective might consider not only consumers, frontline service employees, and retailers or other businesses but also communities where a product is produced (yet not consumed), measurable impacts on the environment or society, internal impacts on employees, behaviors of policy makers or governmental agents (e.g., Wang et al. 2021), top management teams, shareholders and investors, or the media (at the local, regional, and/or [inter-/supra-] national levels).

Key Criteria for Publication in the Special Issue

The special issue is interested in new marketing knowledge that helps address substantial and important societal and business issues, generated through the perspectives of multiple stakeholders (three or more). Multidisciplinary research is welcome though not required. Empirical research and analytical modeling are welcomed and encouraged.

Key criteria that will be used to assess a submission include:

• Scope of the research question. We encourage research that seeks to tackle large-scale societal-business challenges rather than narrow or incremental topics.
• Novelty of the insights.
• The extent to which the novel insights are derived from at least three key stakeholders. New, relevant stakeholder perspectives are encouraged.
• The magnitude of the behavioral change and/or its impact stemming from the work, such as the number of people likely to change their behavior based on the research (in the short or long term) or the number of people who may benefit from the findings if implemented. These can include managers, policy makers, nonprofits, consumers, and communities, etc.
• The broad potential impact of the work.

Submission deadline: May 1, 2026

Special Sessions

Everyone interested in learning more about this special issue is warmly invited to attend the following special sessions:

• An online zoom session in October 2025 (details to follow).
• A special session at the 2026 AMA Winter Academic Conference in Madrid.

All manuscripts will be reviewed as a cohort for this special issue of the Journal of Marketing. All submissions will go through Journal of Marketing’s double-anonymized review and follow standard norms and processes. Submissions must be made via the journal’s ScholarOne site, with author guidelines available here. For any queries, feel free to reach out to the special issue editors.

References

Berry, Leonard L., Tracey S. Danaher, Timothy Keiningham, Lerzan Aksoy, and Tor W. Andreassen (2024), “Social Profit Orientation: Lessons from Organizations Committed to Building a Better World,” Journal of Marketing, 89 (2), 1–19.

MacInnis, Deborah J., Vicki G. Morwitz, Simona Botti, Donna L. Hoffman, Robert V. Kozinets, Don R. Lehmann, John Lynch, Cornelia Pechmann (2020), “Creating Boundary-Breaking, Marketing-Relevant Consumer Research,” Journal of Marketing, 84 (2), 1–23.

United Nations (n.d.), “Major Groups and Other Stakeholders,” https://www.unep.org/civil-society-engagement/major-groups-modalities/major-group-categories.

Van Heerde, Harald J., Christine Moorman, C. Page Moreau, and Robert W. Palmatier, (2021), “Reality Check: Infusing Ecological Value into Academic Marketing Research,” Journal of Marketing, 85 (2), 1–13.

Wang, Yanwen, Michael Lewis, and Vishal Singh (2021), “Investigating the Effects of Excise Taxes, Public Usage Restrictions, and Antismoking Ads across cigarette brands.” Journal of Marketing 85 (3), 150–67.

Go to the Journal of Marketing

The post Call for Papers | Journal of Marketing: Analyzing Trade-Offs and Advancing Solutions to Society’s Challenges Using an Integrated Multiple Stakeholders Perspective appeared first on American Marketing Association.

The post Why Brand Wins! How WTW Turns Identity into Advantage appeared first on American Marketing Association.

In today’s fragmented market, loyalty isn’t just given – it’s engineered. This guide helps enterprise manufacturers design distributor programs that drive real ROI through smarter segmentation, performance-based incentives, and behavioral data. It’s a results-driven framework for scaling engagement, increasing visibility into the sales channel, and proving the value of your incentive budget without relying on soft metrics or outdated models.

The post The No-Nonsense Guide to a High ROI Loyalty Program for Distributors appeared first on American Marketing Association.

A new Journal of Marketing study reveals a surprising solution: anthropomorphizing workout equipment—assigning human-like qualities to objects—can significantly boost exercise motivation. By fostering a sense of companionship, anthropomorphism turns solitary workouts into collaborative experiences. Our research team explores this phenomenon through eight experiments in which participants engaged with either anthropomorphized or standard fitness tools.

Key Findings: How Anthropomorphism Boosts Motivation

• Increased Exercise Plans: Participants who anthropomorphize their workout tools plan more ambitious routines and exercise with greater intensity.
• Companionship Effect: Imagining fitness tools as teammates makes workouts feel less daunting and more enjoyable.
• Enhanced Engagement Beyond Fitness: The motivational benefits extend to educational tools, making learning more engaging.

How It Works: Anthropomorphism in Practice

In one experiment, participants were introduced to a jump rope described as, “Hello! I am your workout partner,” while a control group received the standard description, “This is your workout tool.” Another experiment encouraged participants to imagine their treadmill as a person and describe its personality, creating a “workout buddy” effect.

When participants anthropomorphized their equipment, they reported feeling less alone during their exercise sessions. The imagined relationship between the individual and the equipment transformed a solitary task into an engaging interaction, much like working out with a friend. In the treadmill study, for instance, participants who imagined the treadmill’s personality not only exercised longer but also pushed themselves harder. These feelings of support and partnership reduced the mental barriers to starting or continuing exercise.

Interestingly, participants also described their anthropomorphized tools as being “cheerleaders” or “encouraging friends” rather than just objects. This framing boosted confidence and increased expectations of success, further reinforcing motivation. By cultivating a sense of collaboration, anthropomorphism redefines the exercise experience, making it less about effort and more about teamwork.

Practical Insights for Marketers

Marketers and product designers can leverage these findings to enhance user engagement. Here’s how:

• Human-Like Features: Fitness tools and apps can integrate friendly interfaces, supportive messages, or avatars to foster a sense of partnership.
• Collaborative Messaging: Marketing campaigns should emphasize teamwork, using phrases like, “Let’s tackle this together!” to build user trust and motivation.
• Targeting Diverse Audiences: Understanding the demographic most likely to benefit from anthropomorphic tools—such as beginners or individuals lacking external support—can refine marketing strategies.

Limitations of Anthropomorphism

While anthropomorphism can be effective, its impact is situational and has boundaries:

• Presence of Real Companions: The motivational boost is less significant when a human workout partner is present.
• Inherently Fun Tools: Equipment already perceived as enjoyable (e.g., dance-based workouts) receives less added benefit from anthropomorphic features.
• Controlling Framing: Tools framed as strict “coaches” or “supervisors” can reduce autonomy and diminish enjoyment.

Implications for Public Health

Anthropomorphism’s potential extends beyond fitness, offering applications in education and other self-improvement contexts. By humanizing tools, public health campaigns can create engaging experiences that drive behavioral change.

For instance, educational apps can incorporate friendly, human-like study aids to make learning less intimidating and more enjoyable. Similarly, fitness campaigns targeting inactive populations can emphasize collaboration with anthropomorphic tools to bridge the gap between intention and action.

Broader Applications and Lessons for Practitioners

Consumers should seek out workout tools or apps with well-designed anthropomorphic features to sustain motivation and build long-term commitment. For businesses, investing in anthropomorphic design is a strategic move that enhances consumer well-being and fosters brand loyalty and repeat use.

As physical inactivity and sedentary lifestyles rise globally, stakeholders in public health, marketing, and product design should integrate anthropomorphic elements into their offerings. By doing so, they can help reframe traditionally burdensome tasks as collaborative, enjoyable experiences. Whether tackling fitness or education, the right “partner” can make all the difference.

Source: Lili Wang and Maferima Touré-Tillery, “Cardio with Mr. Treadmill: How Anthropomorphizing the Means of Goal Pursuit Increases Motivation,”  Journal of Marketing.

Go to the Journal of Marketing

The post Cardio with Mr. Treadmill: How Anthropomorphism Increases Motivation appeared first on American Marketing Association.

 Discover how AI can transform core business functions—from marketing to HR—with real-world examples that drive growth, reduce costs, and enhance employee experience. Download the AI Playbook now. 

Helping individuals save time and kickstart creativity with AI tools is a win for any business. But when AI is used to streamline workflows across entire departments, the benefits multiply. 

The AI Playbook for Optimizing Business Processes  explores tangible AI use cases and inspiration you can use to drive transformation across your organization. Read the e-book to learn how broadening your AI applications can help you: 

– Boost revenue, cut costs, and increase employee satisfaction.

– Transform entire departments.

– Hit vital metrics and achieve long-term goals.

The post AI in Action: Optimize your entire Marketing department  appeared first on American Marketing Association.

Organic marketing theory provides insights into marketing phenomena, their causes and consequences, and conditions under which these causes and consequences are stronger or weaker. Theory papers frequently include a set of formal propositions describing causal relationships among well-defined constructs, and arguments in support of the propositions (what causes what, and why).

The special issue is open to “pure theory” papers advancing novel constructs and propositions (frequently, but not always, inducted from qualitative data) as well as “theory + empirical” papers that develop novel propositions, operationalize them as hypotheses, and empirically test them. Note that a very strong theoretical contribution will be expected in all types of papers. Below, we provide more details on what a strong theoretical contribution would include. We also provide guidance on the types of papers that would and would not be a fit for this special issue.

Contributions to Organic Marketing Theory

The following represent contributions to organic marketing theory. Note that some are more likely to be acceptable for the special issue than others.

Novel Constructs and Related Propositions

• Development of novel construct(s) reflecting marketing phenomena. Relationships with and distinctions from extant closely related constructs should be provided. A discussion of the importance of the constructs for marketing should be provided. Formal propositions linking the construct(s) to other constructs, supported by conceptual arguments, should be offered.

Novel Propositions

• Novel propositions about the functional forms of relationships between known/existing constructs related to marketing phenomena, together with supporting arguments.
• Novel propositions that a well-accepted general theory from another discipline does not “work” in a marketing context, together with supporting arguments (these propositions tend to be rare, but could be important if the well-accepted theory is widely used).
• Novel propositions describing causal relationships between known/existing constructs related to marketing phenomena, together with supporting arguments (these propositions/arguments are unlikely to be accepted for publication unless a strong case for their importance can be made).

It is important for authors to be aware of extant research in order to ensure that proposed constructs or propositions are novel (and not repetitive of existing research). Novel arguments that support known relationships are unlikely to be accepted for a publication unless a strong case can be made for their importance. See key selection criteria section below.

Organic Marketing Theory and Overlap with Phenomena of Interest to Other Disciplines

At its core, marketing is about exchanges between/among entities, and people, processes, and institutions that enable and encourage exchanges.

• Given the breadth of marketing, it is natural for marketing phenomena to overlap with phenomena of interest to other disciplines such as economics, psychology, sociology, strategy, organizational behavior, operations, information technology, among others. As such, organic marketing theory may potentially have insights of value to disciplines other than marketing.
• Who develops organic marketing theory is not material. What is material is that the theory (or theoretical contribution) provides novel insights into important phenomena that are uniquely/primarily about marketing, ideally with relatively little overlap with other disciplines.

 What Is NOT of Interest for the Special Issue:

• There are many different types of conceptual contributions (MacInnis 2011). The special issue is interested in organic theory, a particular type of conceptual contribution described above. It is NOT interested in other types of conceptual contributions, valuable as they may be. For example, a conceptual paper that summarizes extant empirical evidence to derive conclusions is a review paper (empirical papers with this goal are meta-analyses). While these types of papers are beneficial, they are NOT aligned with this special issue. Similarly, a paper that advocates for a particular position on an issue would NOT be a good fit with the special issue.
• Relatedly, the special issue is NOT interested in work that takes one or more theoretical propositions from another discipline and applies them in a marketing context to generate new insights about marketing phenomena. While the work may well be important and eminently publishable, it would not be a good fit with the special issue because it would not reflect original theory but rather the application of an existing theory. For example, the following two cases would NOT be a good fit with the special issue:
  – Straight application: Taking a theoretical proposition in another discipline and applying the proposition to a marketing context to explain or predict marketing phenomena.
  – Adapted application: Adapting constructs in a theoretical proposition in another discipline and applying the adapted/modified proposition to a marketing context to explain or predict marketing phenomena.

Key Criteria for Publication in the Special Issue

Key criteria that will be used to assess a submission include:

• Novelty of the insights.
• The extent to which the novel insights are organic (i.e., uniquely/primarily about marketing phenomena). In general, novel constructs and propositions that are uniquely/primarily about marketing phenomena are more organic.
• The extent to which the novel constructs and/or propositions are different from those available in other disciplines.

Importance of the novel insights will be assessed by:

• The number of people likely to change their behavior based on the research (in the short or long term). These include managers, public policy makers, consumers, and other marketing academics.
• The magnitude of their behavioral change and/or its impact.
• The standing or position of the persons who will likely change their behavior (as an indicator of the impact of their behavioral change).

Examples of Papers Advancing Organic Marketing Theory

The following papers, listed in order of publication date, are some exemplars of organic theory building research. The list is not exhaustive, but it provides concrete examples that span both time (four decades) and subfields in marketing (strategy, consumer behavior). While these papers are challenging to write, their citation counts reflect their significant impact on the field. (Citation counts are from Google Scholar as of May 30, 2025.)

1. Parasuraman, A., Valarie A. Zeithaml, and Leonard L. Berry (1985), “A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research,” Journal of Marketing, 49 (4), 41–50. Develops a new theory of service quality (GAPS model). 48,729 citations.
2. Zeithaml, Valarie A. (1988), “Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence,” Journal of Marketing, 52 (3), 2–22. Uses means-end chain theory developed in marketing to develop a new theory on the relations between price, quality, and value with propositions. 35,504 citations.
3. Aaker, David A. and Kevin Lane Keller (1990), “Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions,” Journal of Marketing, 54 (1), 27–41. Develops a theory to explain when brand extensions are more likely to be positively evaluated by consumers. 7,146 citations.
4. Kohli, Ajay K. and Bernard J. Jaworski (1990), “Market Orientation: The Construct, Research Propositions, and Managerial Implications,” Journal of Marketing, 54 (2), 1–18. Develops the construct of market orientation and advances propositions about its antecedents and consequences. 16,525 citations.
5. Keller, Kevin L. (1993), “Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity,” Journal of Marketing, 57 (1), 1–22. Develops a theory of brand equity and advances propositions linking it to brand awareness and brand image. 31,433 citations.
6. Aaker, Jennifer L. (1997), “Dimensions of Brand Personality,” Journal of Marketing Research, 34 (3), 347–56. Develops the novel construct of brand personality and its five dimensions. 17,098 citations.
7. Fournier, Susan (1998), “Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (4), 343–73. Develops a theory of consumer-brand relationship quality. 14,240 citations.
8. Brakus, Joško, Bernd H Schmitt, and Lia Zarantonello (2009), “Brand Experience: What Is It? How Is It Measured? Does It Affect Loyalty?” Journal of Marketing, 73 (3), 52–68. Develops the novel construct of brand experience and advances propositions linking about its consequences. 8,363 citations.
9. Lemon, Katherine N. and Peter C. Verhoef (2016), “Understanding Customer Experience Throughout the Customer Journey,” Journal of Marketing, 80 (6), 69–96. Develops the construct of customer experience, its component stages, and contributing touch points. 8,494 citations.
10. Molner, Sven, Jaideep C. Prabhu, and Manjit S. Yadav (2019), “Lost in a Universe of Markets: Toward a Theory of Market Scoping for Early-Stage Technologies,” Journal of Marketing, 83 (2), 37–61. Develops the novel construct of market scoping mindset and advances propositions linking it to its consequences.
11. Siebert, Anton, Ahir Gopaldas, Andrew Lindridge, and Cláudia Simões (2020), “Customer Experience Journeys: Loyalty Loops Versus Involvement Spirals,” Journal of Marketing, 84 (4), 45–66. Develops a novel typology of customer journeys and advances propositions linking them to its consequences.
12. Burchett, Molly. R., Brian Murtha, and Ajay K. Kohli (2023), “Secondary Selling: Beyond the Salesperson–Customer Dyad,” Journal of Marketing, 87 (4), 575–600. Develops the novel construct of secondary selling and advances propositions linking it to its consequences.

Submission Deadline: August 1, 2026

All manuscripts will be reviewed as a cohort for this special issue of the Journal of Marketing. All submissions will go through Journal of Marketing’s double-anonymized review and follow standard norms and processes. Submissions must be made via the journal’s ScholarOne site, with author guidelines available here. For any queries, feel free to reach out to the special issue editors.

Special Session

The special issue editors are organizing a special session at the 2025 AMA Summer Academic Conference in Chicago on August 23, 2:00–3:15 pm. Everyone interested in learning more about this special issue is invited to attend this session. For conference information and registration, click here.

Reference

MacInnis, Deborah J. (2011), “A Framework for Conceptual Contributions in Marketing,” Journal of Marketing, 75 (4), 136–54.

Go to the Journal of Marketing

The post Call for Papers | Journal of Marketing: Special Issue on Organic Marketing Theory appeared first on American Marketing Association.

In the latest edition, you can compare the strengths of digital asset management platforms like Brandfolder, Bynder, Canto, and MediaValet. These strengths are in the areas that matter most to customers — including ease of use, support, video capabilities, brand management, and ROI.

This peer-powered report reveals the DAM platforms rated as Market Leaders by G2. If you’re evaluating digital asset management platforms, this is the insider insight you need before making a move. Market Leader is the top level in the ranking system. Products in the Market Leader level are rated highly by G2 users and have considerable market presence. Not all DAMs are created equal. Read the report to learn what to look for in a DAM platform.  

The post The 2025 G2 DAM Vendor Report appeared first on American Marketing Association.

Mailchimp, Docusign, and Biogen share how they use Contentful’s dynamic content platform to create scalable, high-impact digital experiences. Whether you’re new to modern architectures or rethinking your tech stack, this panel offers a firsthand look at why leading teams choose Contentful to power their digital strategies.

The post How Mailchimp, DocuSign & Biogen Are Scaling Digital Experiences with AI & Personalization appeared first on American Marketing Association.

In a new Journal of Marketing study, we investigate whether firms traditionally recognized as close competitors exhibit the same rivalry online through similar content strategies or whether they adopt more unique approaches on X. In a competitive digital landscape, marketers realize the importance of differentiating their social media strategies from competitors. Platforms like X offer distinct features such as real-time interaction, community building, and content co-creation that significantly enhance a firm’s ability to stand out. We explore whether and how firms might differentiate themselves from close competitors using X.

Our study examines 199 large consumer-facing retail brands on X over a five-year period, using a novel metric to assess content similarity between these firms and their closest traditional competitors. Results show firms that diverge from their competitors’ strategies benefit from higher engagement and attract new followers more quickly.

Three Tiers of Tweets

A key discovery from our study is a hierarchical structure in content creation strategies. To better understand how firms differentiate their content strategies, we classify tweets into ten distinct categories, grouped into three tiers:

1. All firms we studied produced content to some degree in the five categories that represent the bottom tier, which focus on one-way information dissemination. Examples include promotional messages or product updates.
2. A majority of firms (61%) also adopted content strategies that focused on community engagement.
3. An even lower number of firms, around 35%, added content strategies that focused on user interaction and co-creation.

Firms that focus on community building and co-creation not only differentiate their content strategies from their close competitors but also perform better in terms of engagement and follower growth. In contrast, firms that are more similar to their competitors primarily create content in the base tier, where the content strategy is focused on vertical differentiation from the closest competitors.

The firms that perform best on social media are those that build strong relationships with their followers. These companies excel by using strategies that go beyond simple promotions to create interactive experiences. For example, some firms organize events or launch campaigns that encourage users to share their own content, participate in conversations, or provide feedback on new products. This level of engagement helps differentiate these firms from their competitors and results in stronger brand loyalty.

Our research also highlights the importance of adaptability in social media strategy. As social media platforms like X evolve to offer new tools and features, firms that are quick to adapt and leverage these features are more likely to succeed.

Lessons for Marketers

For marketers and business leaders, the implications of our study are clear. Firms should use novel solutions to monitor competitors’ strategies and focus on differentiating their content strategies if they want to succeed on social media platforms. This means moving beyond basic promotions and embracing strategies that engage users, foster community, and encourage interaction and co-creation. Retailers that can leverage these effectively will see the greatest returns in terms of engagement and follower growth.

Our findings provide vital lessons for Chief Marketing Officers:

• Firms can rank competitors by dissimilarity of content to determine which of their top traditional competitors have a potential social media competitive advantage. This mapping of competitors can help firms better understand their own position in the social media competitive space and strategically develop their own social media content toward further differentiation.

• Firms can use our hierarchical structure to better design their social media differentiation strategies. Our hierarchy connects specific content strategies with engagement on X. It is important for managers to know the capabilities of social media and how they can leverage those capabilities to increase social media engagement.

• To maximize engagement, firms could use emerging novel AI-based solutions that allow monitoring of competitors’ actions and content in real time.

• Managers should use memorable hashtags to create valuable communities of social media followers around their products, events, interactive marketing campaigns, and contests involving followers in value co-creation and co-innovation.

• Platform providers can design mechanisms to facilitate co-creation interactions between firms and followers. For instance, a social media platform might offer a functionality to create “virtual design labs” where firms would initiate discussions around new products and invite ideas and user-generated content from followers. Such value-added features can be priced differently and would serve as additional revenue streams for platforms.

Source: Mikhail Lysyakov, P.K. Kannan, Siva Viswanathan, and Kunpeng Zhang, “Retailer Differentiation in Social Media: An Investigation of Firm-Generated Content on Twitter,” Journal of Marketing.

Go to the Journal of Marketing

The post Standing Out in the Scroll: Why Content Differentiation Beats Imitation on X appeared first on American Marketing Association.