Crafting a publishable scientific article can be challenging, especially for young scholars such as PhD students and postdoctoral fellows. To provide guidance and clarity, at the Italian Journal of Marketing, we decided to leverage the expertise of our Associate Editors.

Associate Editors were invited to answer key questions addressing the fundamental challenges scholars face when preparing their articles. Every three months, a different Associate Editor of the Italian Journal of Marketing will address a new set of questions, providing continuous, up-to-date insights tailored to the evolving needs of the academic community. Readers are also encouraged to actively participate in shaping this initiative by submitting their questions or topics of interest to itjm@simktg.it.

The first series of ‘questions’ explores six critical aspects of academic writing:

1. How to craft an introduction that captivates readers and effectively outlines the research problem.
2. Strategies for engaging critically with the literature rather than merely summarizing it.
3. Ensuring methodological choices align with research aims and questions.
4. Clear presentation of results in quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies.
5. Structuring the discussion to logically follow the results and reinforce the paper’s central narrative.
6. Avoiding common pitfalls when writing the theoretical implications of a paper.

John B. Ford, full professor of Marketing at Old Dominion University (USA), is the first to reply.

How to craft an introduction that captivates readers and effectively outlines the research problem.

The introduction is your first opportunity to capture your reader’s attention and set the stage for your research. To achieve this, you need to sell the gap you have identified in the literature by clearly articulating its significance and explaining why it is crucial to address it. This must be done briefly, ideally within the first two pages, to keep readers interested.

A compelling introduction also lays the foundation for the following sections of the paper by preparing the reader for a deeper discussion of the literature and the subsequent research hypotheses. It can be helpful to incorporate recent facts, examples of brands or companies, current statistics, or anecdotes to make the introduction more engaging and relevant. Furthermore, including a roadmap or outline of the paper at the end of this section can guide readers through the structure of your work, enhancing their understanding and anticipation.

In sum:

• Sell the gap: Highlight the gap in your study’s literature, why it is crucial to close it, and how your research will do so.
• Be concise: Achieve this within the first two pages to maintain the reader’s interest.
• Add relevance: Use recent facts, brand or company examples, statistics, or anecdotes to make the introduction compelling.
• Provide a roadmap: Conclude the introduction with an outline of the paper, guiding the reader through the subsequent sections.

Strategies for engaging critically with the literature rather than merely summarizing it.

The literature background is where you critically engage with previous research to demonstrate the foundation of your study. A common mistake in this section is organizing the discussion around individual scholars or specific papers instead of focusing on overarching concepts, ideas, and findings that cut across studies. This approach can result in a dull and fragmented review.

Instead, you should highlight the nature of the research focus and directly connect it to the identified gap. Long and descriptive summaries should be avoided, as they can bore the reader and detract from the purpose of the section. If it is necessary to include a summary of key papers, consider using a literature review table to present the information clearly and concisely. Your discussion should emphasize the connections between studies, the identified gaps, and the justification for your research.

In sum:

• Focus on concepts, not authors: Organize the literature around ideas, findings, and themes rather than specific scholars or papers.
• Tie to your gap: Connect directly to studies crucial to your identified gap.
• Be critical, not descriptive: Avoid long-winded summaries; argue for the importance of connections and findings.
• Consider a table: If summarizing papers is necessary, use a literature review table to highlight key findings efficiently.

Ensuring methodological choices align with research aims and questions.

The methodology section must demonstrate how your methodological choices align with your research aim and hypotheses. This alignment is crucial to the validity of your study. Your methods should be explicitly tied to the research hypotheses, as these hypotheses stem from the literature gaps you have identified.

The methodology must justify how the chosen methods and data will allow you to test the hypotheses effectively. A well-constructed methodology section provides a clear and convincing rationale for your research design and enhances the credibility of your findings.

In sum:

• Align with hypotheses: The chosen methods should directly address the hypotheses formed from the identified literature gaps.
• Justify your choices: Show how your methods and data collection strategies are appropriate for testing your hypotheses in the given context.

Continue reading on the next page.