Global Journal of Management and Business Research, E: Marketing, Volume 23 Issue 1

data are effectively analyzed and presented in the results and discussions. Of the set of five articles analyzed, three have a strong emphasis on the conventional basis and have positivism and the empiricist-systemic-functionalist approach as their central assumption; corroborating the thesis that the dominant paradigm in marketing is logical-empiricist. This panorama is ratified by Arndt (1985), Lima et al. (2014), Castro Junior et al. (2015), Motta and Iizuka (2016) and Scussel (2017). However, studies influenced by non-traditional epistemological bases point to the emergence of critically oriented studies. However, they are still approaches to critical theory, rather than actual critical studies. By way of conclusion, it is worth noting that constructivist, critical and interpretive studies in marketing are still incipient in relation to the number of traditional studies, as well as being marginalized/ forgotten or undervalued by academia and the scientific field that surrounds it. Marketing is a social and historical phenomenon, closely linked to social facts, organizations and individuals. Consequently, conven- tional epistemological postures impact on the development of the discipline itself, outlining reductionist, circumscribed and decontextualized prisms. The richness brought by the constructivist qualitative research, as well as the critical, dialectic and interpretative, is necessary, since several questions and social themes are left out of the discussions. With the influence of such approaches, new possibilities for investigation, debates in the area, and expansion of the theoretical and methodological scope are possible. The intention is not to discredit or diminish the classical approach, but to promote reflections on possible gaps that can be deepened/expanded; encourage other forms of research outside the mainstream – to break the current hegemony and present new perspectives on marketing. The limitations of this work are also highlighted. First, this work selected a specific period and, therefore, some specific editions of the journal. The year 2018 was chosen due to the fact that in that year two special editions were published in the Journal, one of which deals with the state of the art of research in marketing, a topic that is of interest to the study carried out in this article. One of the works in this issue is by Hair, Harrison and Risher (2018), who point out that the analysis methods used by marketing researchers are changing due to a series of changes in management skills, technological innovations and consumer behavior. Another important point by Hair, Harrison and Risher (2018) is that advances in marketing studies have directed research in the area towards the use of increasingly quantitative methods. Therefore, it is noted that the study did not exhaust the literature on the subject, since the cut for the investigation was limited to the period analyzed, the selected epistemological bases and the journal studied. This study, however, presents paths of analysis that can, in future works, be expanded with the addition of new articles from the same journal or from other journals in the area. Therefore, the discussions presented here need to be weighed with their limitations. Finally, it is pointed out that the results achieved are not conclusive: they point to the need for further studies and thus raise suggestions for future research: other studies may expand the research carried out in this work, including other bases and epistemological approaches, a period of longer time, and the main national and international journals of Marketing and Administration. R eferences R éférences R eferencias 1. ALVES-MAZZOTTI, AJ; GEWANDSNAJDER, F. Method in the natural and social sciences: quantitative and qualitative research. São Paulo: Pioneer, 1999. 2. ARNDT, Johann. On making marketing science more scientific: role of orientations, paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving. Journal of Marketing, vol. 49, no. 3, p. 11-23, 1985. 3. BANDEIRA-DE-MELLO, Rodrigo. Qualitative research software. Qualitative research in organizational studies: paradigms, strategies and methods. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2006. 4. BENSON, JK. Organizations: a dialectical point of view. In: Séguin, F. and Chanlat, JF L'analyse des organisations: une anthologie sociologique. Take I. Montreal: Gaëtan-Morin, 1983. 5. BERNARDO, Maria Helena et al. Brand Love in the Cosmetics Sector: A Comparative Analysis of Global Brand Resellers in Brazil and Mexico. Brazilian Magazine of Marketing, v. 17, no. 1, p. 19- 30, 2018. 6. BOAVA, DLT; MACÊDO, FMF. Brief Considerations on the Epistemology of Marketing. XV SEMEAD- SEMINARS IN ADMINISTRATION. Anais... São Paulo, 2012. 7. BRANDALISE, Mary Ângela Teixeira et al. Critical Theory: fundamentals and possibilities for research ineducational evaluation. PESQUISEDUCA Electronic Journal, v. 9, no. 17, p. 72-90, 2017. 8. BRYMAN, Alan. Quantity and quality in social research. London: Unwin Hyman, 1988. 9. BURTON, D. Critical marketing theory: the blueprint? European Journal of Marketing, vol. 35, no. 5/6, p. 722–743, 2001. 10. CAHILL, DJ When to use Qualitative Methods: how about at the midpoint? Marketing News, Chicago, IL, v. 32, n.1, p.15-17, Jan. 1998. Methodological Nature and Epistemological bases of Qualitative Studies in Marketing 30 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXIII Issue I Version I Year 2023 ( )E © 2023 Global Journals