Getting ideas for an academic study: conceptual and empirical

1. Getting ideas for an academic study: conceptual and empirical A Presentation in the Toulouse Graduate School, University of North Texas Charles Blankson, Ph.D. Department of Marketing & Logistics, College of Business

2. UNT Ph.D. Degree

3. Getting ideas for Ph.D. study • Observation and interaction with subjects/objects • Personal experience • Curiosity • Personal deduction • Purposeful reading of current business/social conundrum or challenge or interest or text book • Media and public information on an issue (issues) • Following an expert’s study or guidelines (e.g., a committee member’s research stream).

4. Recent Ph.D. titles from the Department of Marketing & Logistics, UNT • My committee membership • Dr. Tanawat (Tom) Hirunyawipada (Ph.D. in Marketing, University of North Texas) Title: How Componential Factors and Constraints Enhance Creativity in New Product Ideation. Accepted a position at University of Dayton – Dayton, OH. 2007 • Dr. Clinton Amos (Ph.D. in Marketing, University of North Texas). Title: The Impact of Visceral Influences on Consumers’ Evaluation of Potentially Misleading Advertising. Accepted a position at Augusta State University, SC.2008

5. Ph.D. titles contd. • Dr. Lilly Ye (Ph.D. in Marketing, University of North Texas). Title: The Impact of Gender Effects on Consumers’ Perceptions of Brand Equity: A Cross-Cultural Investigation. Accepted a position at Frostburg State University, MD. 2008 • Dr. Gary Ray Holmes (Ph.D. in Marketing, University of North Texas). Tile: Symbolic Visuals in Advertising: The Role of Relevance. Accepted a position at Drury University, MO. 2008

6. Ph.D. titles contd. • Dr. Selcuk Ertekin (Ph.D. in Marketing, University of North Texas). Title: An Assessment of Consumers’ Willingness to Patronize Foreign-Based Business Format Franchises: An Investigation in the Fast-Food Sector. Accepted a position at South West Missouri State University, MO. 2009 • Dr. Stanley Coffie (Ph.D. in Marketing, Birkbeck College, University of London, UK). Title: A Strategic Market Positioning Typology for Service Organizations in Ghana. Accepted a position at the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA), Accra, Ghana. 2011

7. Ph.D. titles contd. • Dr. Sally Samih Baalbaki (Ph.D. in Marketing, University of North Texas). Title: Consumer Perspective of Brand Equity Measurement: A New Scale. Accepted a position at Metropolitan State University of Denver, CO. 2012 • Dr. Trang P. Tran (Ph.D. in Marketing, University of North Texas). Title: Regulatory Orientation, Message Framing and Influences on Customer Behaviors. Accepted a position at SUNY – Oneonta, NY. 2012

8. Recent Master’s Degree Dissertations • Mr. Emre Barali (MA Marketing). Dissertation title: An Investigation of Congruence between Companies Positioning Strategies and Target Customers’ Perceptions of Positioning Messages,2010, Kingston University Business School, London, UK. Co- supervisor • Ms. Alexandra Araujo Alvarez Jimenez (MA Marketing). Dissertation title: The Impact of Mergers in Positioning,2010, Kingston University Business School, London, UK. Co-supervisor

9. Master’s Degrees contd. • Ms. Lilian Andrea Diaz Quintero (MA Marketing). Dissertation title: The Interrelationship between Variables that Influence Consumers’ Perceptions toward Advertising, 2010, Kingston University Business School, London, UK. Co-supervisor • Mr. Behic Aydin (MA Marketing). Dissertation title: Relationship between size of the Company and Positioning Strategies,2010, Kingston University Business School, London, UK. Co-supervisor

10. Undergraduate Honors Program • Miss Jennifer Ditrich, undergraduate (BA Business Administration) Honors Program. Thesis title: The Effect of Advertising on Female Body Images, January 2005 – May 2005, Long Island University, C. W. Post Campus, New York, USA. • Mr. Joseph Ambrogio (BA Business Administration) Honors Program. Thesis title: College Students’ Choice Criteria of Credit Card Brands: A Replication Study, January 2004 – July 2005, Long Island University, C. W. Post Campus, New York, USA.

11. Getting ideas for Ph.D. study • What is the definition of the Ph.D. degree? • What are the expectations at UNT? • What is the purpose of your study? • What is (are) the theoretical foundation(s) of the area of interest • Seminal/original scholarly papers – who are the authorities? • What is the state of the literature? Who has done what? • Determination of gaps in the literature • How will you examine the research questions? • What is the research context and why is it important?

12. Getting ideas for Ph.D. study • The theoretical review, observations, consultations with experts will help you focus on particular area that has strong theoretical foundation on which to claim legitimacy. • Anchor your study within your discipline – with the purpose of increasing knowledge in your field. • The theoretical review will help you demonstrate your thorough comprehension of your field of study and be able to intelligently critique others’ study.

13. Getting ideas for Ph.D. study • The left & right (this or that) stages: • Select and refine a topic: • Look at the “limitations and future research directions of previous or current journal articles or Ph.D. dissertations” • Review the literature – be a critical reader of articles • Summarize and identify key issues • Write, i.e., put it on paper – write down your ideas as they occur – use a note pad. Write everyday, not every week.

14. Getting ideas for Ph.D. study • Read, summarize, critique and identify key issues from each article read – place these in a Table format • List all references, e.g. Yadav, Manjit S. (2010), “The Decline of Conceptual Articles and Implications for Knowledge Development”, Journal of Marketing, 74(1), 1-19 (or see the journal) • For each article, identify the purpose/objectives/research questions • Conceptual framework – literature base/theory • Propositions/hypotheses or statement of aim and objectives • Research method(s) used • Results/findings • Conclusions • Now, what do you see as the gaps for research?

16. Getting ideas for Ph.D. study

17. Getting ideas for Ph.D. study • Develop precise conceptual definitions for the constructs and measurements – either borrowed from the literature or DIY • Constructs are the building blocks of theory. And without well-developed conceptual definitions for the constructs, it becomes difficult/impossible to develop a coherent theory. • Without a definition, you cannot measure a concept/construct. • Avoid pseudo definitions.

18. Issues about definitions of constructs • Definitions are important (Pastrana et al., 2008); they serve as the impetus for conducting consistent research in social phenomena; positioning is no different. • “Despite the extensive research in the concept of positioning, a review of the literature indicates a level of ambiguity and inconsistency associated with the definition of the positioning. Accordingly, scholars have documented the “absence of a clear, universally accepted definition of the construct” (Kalafatis et al., 2000) and the lack of abiding themes capable of reflecting the basis of positioning frameworks in the literature (Hooley, Greenley, Fahy, and Cadogan 2001; Levitt 2002; Piercy 2005; Schultz 2006). This quandary however, has resulted in inconsistent (and in some instances, inaccurate) conceptualization, and research in positioning” Blankson, Dai, and Boatswain (2013 – on-going study).

19. Getting ideas for Ph.D. study • Evaluate the hypotheses before designing the empirical study • Are the hypotheses clearly written? • Is each of the hypotheses falsifiable/testable? • Do any of the hypotheses involve truism or tautologies? • Are any of the hypotheses trivial to raise questions about the methodology? • Is any of the theoretical rationale provided for each hypothesis compelling? • Are there any additional theoretical arguments that would strengthen the conceptual support for the hypotheses? • Do the hypotheses to be tested represent a cohesive set? Follow typical examples in articles and adapt to suit your study. Aggressively solicit criticism of your conceptual framework.

20. Identify the intended contributions of the study • Conceptual contributions: • Improved conceptual definitions of the original constructs • The identification of and conceptual definition of additional constructs to be added to the conceptual framework (e.g., additional dependent, independent, mediating, and/or moderator variables). • The development of additional theoretical linkages (research hypotheses) with rationale • The development of improved theoretical rationale for existing linkages.

21. 2. Empirical contributions • Testing a theoretical linkage between two constructs that has not previously been tested. • Examining the effects of a potential moderator variable on the nature of the relationship between two constructs • Determining the degree to which a variable mediates the relationship between two constructs • Investigating the psychometric properties of an important scale.

22. 3. Methodological contributions • Reduce the potential problems with shared method variance through the use of multiple methods of measurement • Increase the generalizability of the research through more appropriate sampling procedures • Allow the investigation of plausible “third-variable explanations” for the results of past studies • Enhance the construct validity of key measures through the use of refined multiple-item measures and/or the use of measurement approaches that do not rely on self-reports. • Scale development and validation of a concept/construct.

23. Designing the empirical study • Bear in mind, nothing can be done to improve the research methodology once the data have been collected. • Also, if the data are seriously flawed, no amount of re-writing of the manuscript/thesis/dissertation can overcome weakness of the methodology. So, prior to embarking upon the data collection, seek critical feedback on the research designs.

24. Pretest your Questionnaire • Subject your already critiqued questionnaire to rigorous pretest by experts – dissertation committee, other faculty members. • Then administer the refined questionnaire to a pre-test of say, 30 participants/respondents (e.g., students, university secretaries/administrators, members of the general public, managers etc.). • Remember to document all these procedures as appropriate in your methodology.

25. And finally…………Dr.

30. Understanding literature review • http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/tutorials/lit-review/