The purpose of this editorial is to stimulate debate and discussion amongst marketing scholarship regarding the implications for scientific research of increasingly large amounts of data and sophisticated data analytic techniques.
The authors respond to a recent editorial in WIRED magazine which heralds the demise of the scientific method in the face of the vast data sets now available.
The authors propose that more data makes theory more important, not less. They differentiate between raw prediction and scientific knowledge – which is aimed at explanation.
These thoughts are preliminary and intended to spark thinking and debate, not represent editorial policy. Due to space constraints, the coverage of many issues is necessarily brief.
Marketing researchers should find these thoughts at the very least stimulating, and may wish to investigate these issues further.
This piece should provide some interesting food for thought for marketing researchers.
