Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.


Search Results

Pancer, E., McShane, L., and Noseworthy, T. (2017). "Isolated Environmental Cues and Product Efficacy Penalties: The Color Green and Eco-Labels", Journal of Business Ethics, 143(1), 159-177.

View Paper

Abstract The current work examines how cues traditionally used to signal environmental friendliness, specifically the color green and eco-labels, and influence product efficacy perceptions and subsequent purchase intentions. Across three experiments, we find that environmental cues used in isolation (i.e., green color without an environmental label or an environmental label without green color) reduce perceptions of product efficacy. We argue that this efficacy discounting effect occurs because the isolated use of an environmental cue introduces category ambiguity by activating competing functionality and environmentally friendly schemas during evaluation. We discuss the implications of our findings for research on environmental consumption as well as offer insight into the effective use of environmental cues on product packaging.

Belk, R. (2016). "Comprendre le Robot: Commentaires sur Goudey et Bonnin (“Understanding the Robot: Comments on Goudey and Bonnin”)", Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 31(4), 89-97.

View Paper

Abstract Goudey and Bonnin provide an important demonstration of our willingness to accept robots regardless of the degree to which they look like us. This comment seeks to expand their insights in two ways. First, by broadening our conception of what constitutes a robot, I argue that we have already accepted many non-humanoid robots, and that even robotic entities without a visual presence can be compelling and engaging. Second, I suggest expanding the original paper’s psychological treatment of category ambiguity through the anthropological treatment of Mary Douglas. Douglas suggests that category ambiguity is abhorrent because things perceived to transgress categorical boundaries challenge our cultural beliefs and social order. In the case of robots, the beliefs that are challenged are our basic understandings of what makes humans unique and privileged in the world. As machines grow more and more capable, by some accounts they threaten to eclipse and even supplant the human race. I identify several behavioral and ethical research issues that are imperative if we are to deal with and prepare for such possibilities.