The following policies are applicable to all journals published by the American Marketing Association. Updated: May 2021
Table of Contents
1. Overview: Replication and Integrity in AMA Publications
2. Review Process
3. Sharing of Reviewing Responsibilities
4. Concurrent Reviews
5. Conflicts of Interest
6. Resubmissions
7. Author Misconduct Policy and Procedures
8. Falsification of Data/Misreporting of Data
9. Appendices
10. Additional Supplementary Materials During the Review Process
11. Protecting Intellectual Property
12. AMA Data Scraping Policy
1. Overview: Replication and/or Extension of Results
The American Marketing Association (AMA) is committed to fostering the meaningful exchange of information to help create an environment for constructive criticism and free exchange of ideas. As publisher of Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of International Marketing, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, and Journal of Interactive Marketing, the AMA expects authors to adhere to the highest standards of integrity in research and the communication of research results and findings. Papers submitted to AMA journals should include enough information (including in-text, Web appendix, or other online supplements) so as to allow a reasonably trained researcher to replicate the results. This should include a precise description of the research and analysis procedures.
The AMA requires the authors of manuscripts submitted to AMA journals to share additional details of their research findings and insights when requested by a journal editor. Although sharing and posting of data is not required, such additional information may include computer code, instruments, and other relevant information deemed necessary to facilitate replication. If there are any proprietary restriction on information, authors must notify the editor at time of manuscript submission.
2. Review Process
All reviews will use a double-anonymous review process. Reviewers and journal editors are expected to provide comments and critiques in a confidential, constructive, prompt, and unbiased manner appropriate for their position of responsibility. Collegiality, respect for the author’s dignity, and the search for ways to improve the quality of the manuscript should characterize the review process. The editor has the final authority for the acceptance or rejection of any article.
3. Sharing of Reviewing Responsibilities
Sharing of reviewing responsibilities is inappropriate. The review is the sole responsibility of the person to whom it was assigned by the journal editor. Students and colleagues should not be asked to prepare reviews unless the journal editor has given explicit prior approval. Each person contributing to a review should receive formal recognition.
4. Concurrent Reviews
AMA policy prohibits an article under review at an AMA journal from being concurrently reviewed at another journal without prior discussion with and written permission from the involved AMA journal editor.
5. Conflicts of Interest
Conflicts of interest may arise in a variety of situations, and therefore the author is required to inform the editor of such conflict. A conflict of interest may exist when a manuscript under review puts forth a position contrary to the reviewer’s published work or when a manuscript author or reviewer has a substantial direct or indirect financial interest in the subject matter of the manuscript. Because it is AMA policy to engage in a double-anonymized review process, a conflict of interest may also exist when a reviewer knows the author of a manuscript. The reviewer should consult the journal editor in such situations to decide whether to review the manuscript. A conflict of interest does not exist when an author disagrees with a reviewer’s assessment that a problem is unimportant or disagrees with an editorial outcome.
6. Resubmissions
Manuscripts that have been rejected are not eligible for further consideration by the same journal and thus should not be resubmitted. If a revision is allowed, it will be explicitly stated in the Editor’s decision. Other revisions of previously rejected manuscripts will be promptly returned to the authors without review.
7. Author Misconduct Policy and Procedures
Overview
As a publisher of peer-reviewed journals, the American Marketing Association requires all journal submissions to adhere to the highest of ethical standards and best practices in publishing. All writing and research submitted to an AMA journal is expected to present accurate information and to properly cite all content referenced from other materials.
Overlap
The value of a publication depends on its incremental contribution. Therefore, it is inappropriate to submit articles with substantial overlap. This overlap can result from the use of the same data or analyses or when providing parallel substantive or theoretical results. When there is a question about defining overlap, particularly that which arises from their own work, it is the authors’ responsibility to notify and alert the Editor. The Editor will make a binding decision whether a manuscript submitted to an AMA journal is too similar to an article already published there or elsewhere.
When writing a paper, it is important for authors to define its incremental contribution by referencing relevant work on which the paper builds. Authors are expected to search for and reference the related work of others. Authors are especially responsible for informing the Editor about their own work, whether it is published, in working paper form, or under review. When questions arise about related work, the Editor will provide guidance to the authors. Submitting a paper that is substantially the same as a previously published paper is considered a serious breach of professional ethics and may warrant the Editor contacting officials at the authors’ institutions regarding this breach. In the event that the author(s) is not affiliated with an institution, alternative steps may be taken.
Plagiarism
As defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary, to plagiarize is “to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own,” “use (another’s production) without crediting the source,” or to “present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source” (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plagiarize Accessed March 29, 2012). The American Marketing Association considers other forms of plagiarism to include “self-plagiarism”—instances in which an author borrows from their own previously published work without the proper citation. It is also unacceptable to submit manuscripts to AMA journals that have previously been published anywhere in any language. It is the authors’ responsibility to inform or notify the Editor upon submission if there is any doubt whether a manuscript may violate any of these terms.
Detection, Investigation, and Penalty
In any instance of suspected misconduct, the AMA pledges to carry out the process of detection, investigation, and penalty with fairness and confidentiality during the internal investigation. The process for detection, investigation, and penalty for suspected plagiarism is as follows:
Detection
Each respective journal Editor, along with the Editorial Board and non–Editorial Board reviewers, will serve to detect instances of plagiarism. The AMA may use software or other tools to assist in the detection of plagiarism. When an Editor suspects plagiarism (or is informed by a reviewer who suspects plagiarism), they will make a judgment whether the claim has any merit. If the Editor determines that there has been potential misconduct, they will inform both the Vice President of Publications and Managing Editor and provide a detailed account of the possible violation or misconduct.
Investigation
When informed by the journal Editor, the Vice President of Publications will determine whether further investigation is required. The Vice President of Publications may choose to assemble a review committee of scholars to determine the exact nature and extent of the suspected misconduct. Each individual investigation may warrant the assembly of a new ad hoc committee. Any committee member who is perceived to have a conflict of interest must recuse themself from the process. The Editor of the journal in question will not serve on the committee. If it is determined that an act of plagiarism has been committed, the Vice President of Publications will inform the author(s), in writing, with a detailed description of the alleged offense. The Vice President of Publications will offer the author(s) an opportunity to respond to the allegation. In events in which more than one author is involved, the authors may collaborate on their response or respond individually. If the committee concludes that no offense has been committed, no further action will be taken, and the Vice President of Publications will inform the authors. If the committee determines that there has been misconduct, the process will move into a penalty phase.
Penalty
In the event that an author (or authors) has been found to have engaged in some form of misconduct, they are to be subjected to a penalty. The nature and extent of the penalty will be determined by the Vice President of Publications with the advice and counsel of the committee members. The penalty will be dictated by the nature of the offense. All sitting Editors of AMA journals will be informed. The committee is empowered to customize penalties for each individual in instances in which multiple authors are involved. In extreme circumstances, the committee reserves the right to inform an author’s institution, depending on the seriousness of the offense.
Falsification of Data/Misreporting of Data
The AMA expects all submissions to include data that are honestly and accurately reported according to the accepted best practices of scholarly publishing. In instances in which falsified or grossly misreported data are suspected, the process outlined above (see Plagiarism) will be activated.
8. Falsification of Data/Misreporting of Data
The AMA expects all submissions to include data that are honestly and accurately reported according to the accepted best practices of scholarly publishing. In instances in which falsified or misreported data are suspected, the procedures outlined below will be followed.
In any instance of suspected misconduct, the AMA pledges to carry out the process of detection, investigation, and penalty with fairness and confidentiality during the internal inquiry. The process for detection, investigation, and, if necessary, penalty and retraction for suspected falsification/misreporting of data is as follows:
Detection
Each respective journal Editor, along with the Editorial Board and non–Editorial Board reviewers, will serve to detect instances of data falsification. When an Editor suspects malfeasance (or is informed by a reviewer who suspects malfeasance), they will make a judgment whether the claim has any merit. If the Editor determines that there has been potential misconduct, they will inform both the Vice President of Publications and Managing Editor and provide a detailed account of the possible violation or misconduct. In the case where work has been published, readers suspecting falsification/misreporting should contact the editor. The sitting editor will then review the case, operating under the policies provided herein.
Investigation
When informed by the journal Editor, the Vice President of Publications will determine whether further investigation is required. The Vice President of Publications may choose to assemble a review committee of scholars to determine the exact nature and extent of the suspected misconduct. Each individual investigation may warrant the assembly of a new ad hoc committee. Any committee member who is perceived to have a conflict of interest must recuse themselves from the process. The Editor of the journal in question will not serve on the committee. If it is determined that an act of misconduct has been committed, the Vice President of Publications will inform the author(s), in writing, with a detailed description of the alleged offense. The Vice President of Publications will offer the author(s) an opportunity to respond to the allegation. In events in which more than one author is involved, the authors may collaborate on their response or respond individually. If the committee concludes that no offense has been committed, no further action will be taken, and the Vice President of Publications will inform the authors. If the committee determines that there has been misconduct, the process will move into a penalty phase.
In order to conduct a full and fair investigation, authors may be required to provide materials that go above and beyond the aforementioned (II. Requesting Supplementary Materials). If a paper uses proprietary data covered by a non-disclosure agreement signed by the author(s), and the author(s) are not able to meet the data requirements, the committee chair may ask for specific (appropriately redacted) details of the agreement that prevent the authors from providing the required materials. The committee may choose to provide an exemption. If the committee chooses not to waive the requirements, the author(s) will have the option of withdrawing the paper from the journal review process. However, in such cases, the committee chair may determine to continue the investigation and levy a penalty if misconduct is suspected.
All information provided will be used solely for the purpose of conducting the investigation. All information will remain private and will not be distributed beyond the investigating committee. All materials will be destroyed upon the conclusion of the investigation.
Penalty
In the event that an author (or authors) is found to have engaged in some form of misconduct, they will be subject to a penalty, the nature and extent of which will be determined by the Vice President of Publications with the advice and counsel of the committee members. The penalty will be commensurate with the nature of the offense. All sitting Editors of AMA journals will be informed of the penalty. The committee is empowered to customize penalties for each individual author in instances in which multiple authors are involved. In extreme circumstances, the committee reserves the right to inform an author’s institution, depending on the seriousness of the offense.
Article Retraction
In the event that ethical misconduct (e.g. misrepresentation/falsification of data, pervasive errors, plagiarism, multiple submission, etc.) is determined to have occurred in a manuscript published in an AMA journal, the AMA reserves the right to issue a public retraction of the manuscript in question. The retraction will come in the form of a note published in a subsequent issue of the journal. The article’s citation will be labeled as “Retracted” in all databases and the electronic version of the manuscript file will be clearly marked as “Retracted.”
9. Appendices
The AMA shall employ the following set of Appendix Guidelines for the AMA journals which will be publicly available.
Purposes of Appendices
The purpose of an appendix is to provide supplementary materials that are central to the understanding of the manuscript/article, but for the benefit of the reader is more easily consumed as separate from the body of the article. The purpose of a web appendix is to provide supplementary materials that are highly relevant to the manuscript/article and may facilitate replications (e.g., study stimuli, pretests, replication studies, supplementary analyses). Moreover, material that is not directly relevant (e.g., additional studies that are not central to the conclusions of the manuscript/article) should not be included in the web appendix.
Submission of Appendices
Appendices shall be submitted via the standard manuscript submission process. Each manuscript should have (at most) one web appendix that can be accessed and, if the manuscript is accepted, can be published digitally as a single file. Files will be converted to pdf when uploaded for submission. This single file can be formatted with multiple sections (see point 3, c below). Web appendices do not count in the individual journal page limits.
Publication of Appendices
Authors should use the following guide for formatting web appendices. Examples of web appendices can be made available for reference.
a. The web appendix should follow the formatting of the journal.
b. The web appendix should include the title of the paper, author names, author contact details on the first page of the web appendix.
c. If the web appendix has multiple sections, these sections should be listed in a table of contents that appears on the first page of the file, with page numbers for each section. Each section of the web appendix should begin on a new page. Web appendix sections should be clearly labeled Web Appendix A, Web Appendix B, and so on, and may be given descriptive titles, such as Web Appendix A: Robustness Checks. If multiple web appendix sections are referenced individually in the article, they should be referenced in alphanumeric order (e.g., Web Appendix E should not be mentioned in the article before Web Appendices A through D). The same rule should be applied to web appendix figures and tables if they are mentioned in the article. Tables and figures in the web appendix should have the letter “W” before each table and figure number.
d. References that are cited in only in the web appendix should be listed at the end of the web appendix.
Copy Editing of Appendices
Web appendices will not be copy edited by the journal. A disclosure statement should be included on the first page of the web appendix noting, “These materials have been supplied by the authors to aid in the understanding of their paper. The AMA is sharing these materials at the request of the authors.”
Review of Appendices
Each journal shall have independent authority in how it provides guidance to reviewers about the degree of scrutiny that they should apply to materials included in the web appendices.
Copyright of Appendices
Web appendices shall not have the same copyright protection as published papers. Authors grant non-exclusive copyright to AMA when they provide their web appendix for publication, but they also maintain access to the materials.
10. Additional Supplementary Materials During the Review Process
In addition to the above, during the course of the review process the editor may request additional materials—including data—if they are seen as essential for judging the merits of the research. Data and other requested materials would be viewed confidentially by the review team. The Editor must be notified in advance if such requests could not be met due to proprietary or other restrictions.
11. Protecting Intellectual Property
The AMA is committed to the protection of intellectual property. When supplementary materials are requested during the review period, they will be subject to the AMA’s double-anonymized peer-review process in order to maintain author anonymity. Note, however, that author anonymity is not uniform for all AMA journals regarding Area Editors or Associate Editors. It is at the discretion of the sitting editor if AEs are made aware of author identification.
Reviewer team members will not use ideas from or show another person the manuscript or supplementary materials they have been asked to review without the explicit permission of the manuscript’s author, obtained through the journal editor. Advice regarding specific, limited aspects of the manuscript may be sought from colleagues with specific expertise, provided the author’s identity and intellectual property remain secure.
12. AMA Data Scraping Policy
AMA’s data scraping policy is applicable to authors who use data obtained from publicly accessible sources, such as websites or mobile applications. The ultimate goal of this policy is to protect authors and AMA journals from legal actions.1
In cases where the source is private or proprietary, such that access required signing a usage agreement or monetary payment, the author should verify prior to submission that the data can be used for research purposes. A violation of this policy may result in withdrawal of the manuscript from AMA journals, even after acceptance.
In other cases, we direct authors to follow the Fair Use Policy of the data owner, but we acknowledge that gray areas to this policy exist. To help understand the Fair Use Policy, we encourage authors to review Measuring Fair Use: The Four Factors. The core intent of this policy is to avoid data use that materially harms individual, business, public sector, or societal interests.
In particular, one challenge in applying the Fair Use Policy concerns data scraped from public sources. Many websites explicitly ban collection of data through scraping in their Terms of Use. However, a lack of case law and findings make it difficult to determine the precise conditions under which such a policy is enforceable. One potential requirement for enforcement is that the owner of the publicly accessible data (e.g., the website) demonstrates that material harm may come to its users or its operations due to the data scraping activity (e.g., aggressive scrapping strategies that may affect operational performance of a business owners’ servers). If the data owner can demonstrate material harm, it’s possible that such publicly scraped data would not be permitted for research use.
Therefore, operationally, we provide the following guidelines to aid authors in interpreting and implementing this policy. The following are illustrative examples of different data scraping activities and their associated risk:
- Lower Risk: Scraping data from a public website that requires no login information, the material is public to all, and it does not contain any individual-level sensitive information (e.g., customer addresses, phone numbers, emails, names, etc.)
- Higher Risk: Scraping data from a public site that requires creating a user account, particularly when such behavior is in violation of the user agreement.
- Not permitted: Using data from Wikileaks or other data sources that obtained the data through illegal activity, such as hacking or data leaks. However, rare exceptions to this case do exist.2
AMA will enforce this policy by:
- Denying Submission: Journals will not allow review or publication of manuscripts that use data originally obtained in an illegal manner, unless the original data source grants use of the data and/or the Editor in Chief grants an explicit exception at the time of submission. These data may violate the norm of avoiding material harm to business or public interests.
- Retroactive Withdrawal: If AMA learns that a manuscript produced material harm or the data were obtained illegally without prior permission from the original data source, the article will be reviewed for possible retroactive withdrawal. This withdrawal will be pursuant to the usage of the data and not to the results themselves. The key emphasis will be how the data were obtained and not the results of the analysis.
If authors are uncertain how this policy might apply to their data, they should consult with the Editor in Chief prior to initial submission.
1This policy is inspired by the Management Science Data Provenance Policy (January 2019).
2For example, Londoño-Vélez and Ávila-Mahecha (2021), “Enforcing Wealth Taxes in the Developing World: Quasi-experimental Evidence from Columbia,” American Economic Review: Insights, 3(2): 131-48, used data from the Panama Papers. Hacked or leaked data could be legitimately used when it is already publicly accessible and researchers remove all personally identifiable information. The authors should seek IRB approval to use these data at their institutions prior to consultation with the Editor-in-Chief of the journal at the time of submission.