You're deciding how much weight to put on "the research says" when a team pushes back on a plan. This finding cuts against the instinct that marketing evidence is softer than the established social sciences: the typical marketing study explains about as much as the typical psychology study does. But the same evidence says not to expect that research base to keep getting sharper on its own: it's grown into a mature field, and a few areas already carry most of the confidence. Knowing which areas that is changes how hard you push back versus how much you ask for local testing.
Marketing research explains about as much of market behavior as psychology does — and it isn't getting stronger over time, it's leveling off.
A large pooling of marketing research across eight subject areas puts marketing's average predictive power on par with, or slightly ahead of, long-established fields like psychology and social psychology. But that knowledge base isn't accelerating: it's maturing, with a few pockets still gaining ground and most holding steady.
Data chart
Evidence strength differs sharply by topic, so leaders should trust pricing and consumer-behavior findings more than methods or new-product findings.
Key takeaway
Marketing evidence is about as strong as psychology's, but it has matured rather than kept accelerating.
Source
Eisend, M. (2015). Have we progressed marketing knowledge? A meta-meta-analysis of effect sizes in marketing research. Journal of Marketing, 79(3), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.14.0288
Evidence strength: Strong. The study pools 176 marketing meta-analyses (1,841 effect sizes from more than 7,500 primary studies, 1918-2012); it measures how much marketing research as a body of knowledge explains market behavior, not the financial return or ROI of any specific marketing action.