The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Meta-Analysis of Satisfaction in Marketing Channel Relationships
Abstract
The authors advance a conceptual model of channel member satisfaction that distinguishes between economic and noneconomic satisfaction. The resulting model then is tested using meta-analysis. Meta-analysis enables the empirical investigation of a model involving several constructs that never have been examined simultaneously within an individual study. More specifically, the authors unify the stream of research on power use—the focus of many satisfaction studies in the 1970s and 1980s—with more recent work on trust and commitment, which usually explores antecedents other than power use. The results indicate that economic satisfaction and noneconomic satisfaction are distinct constructs with differential relationships to various antecedents and consequences. Furthermore, this study demonstrates that satisfaction is both conceptually and empirically separable from the related constructs of trust and commitment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299405800302 · Cited by 22,355
Developing buyer-seller relationships
Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H., & Oh, S. (1987) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298705100202 · Cited by 9,139
Determinants of Long-Term Orientation in Buyer-Seller Relationships
Ganesan, S. (1994) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299405800201 · Cited by 6,741
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
Relationship Quality in Services Selling: An Interpersonal Influence Perspective
Crosby, L. A., Evans, K. R., & Cowles, D. (1990) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299005400306 · Cited by 4,763
Rempel, J. K., Holmes, J. G., & Zanna, M. P. (1985) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.1.95 · Cited by 3,146
Generalizations about trust in marketing channel relationships using meta-analysis
Geyskens, I., Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Kumar, N. (1998) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/s0167-8116(98)00002-0 · Cited by 890
Self-citation
Cited by
Kirca, A. H., Jayachandran, S., & Bearden, W. O. (2005) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.69.2.24.60761 · Cited by 2,182
Lam, S. Y., Shankar, V., Erramilli, M. K., & Murthy, B. (2004) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1177/0092070304263330 · Cited by 1,828
Van Wijk, R., Jansen, J. J. P., & Lyles, M. A. (2008) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00771.x · Cited by 1,335
Antecedents of B2C Channel Satisfaction and Preference: Validating e-Commerce Metrics
Devaraj, S., Fan, M., & Kohli, R. (2002) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.13.3.316.77 · Cited by 1,205
Ulaga, W., & Eggert, A. (2006) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/03090560610648075 · Cited by 762
Metadata
- Authors
- Geyskens, I., Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Kumar, N.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-05
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 223-238
- ISSN
- 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7193
- OpenAlex
- W4251944604
- Cited by
- 474
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 0.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Meta-Analysis of Satisfaction in Marketing Channel Relationships. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/002224379903600207
- The paper
- Geyskens, I., Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Kumar, N. (1999). A Meta-Analysis of Satisfaction in Marketing Channel Relationships. Journal of Marketing Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379903600207
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
