Purpose – The topic of scholarly journals is important to the marketing discipline and the worldwide research communities, due to the way the journals are categorized and judged in available and compiled journal rankings. The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss the underlying measures of journal rankings in scholarly journals in marketing. Design/methodology/approach – It is limited to the scholarly journals and journal rankings of the marketing discipline. Findings – Journal rankings of scholarly journals in marketing are mainly based upon single-item measures based upon either citations or perceptions, without any estimates of validity, reliability or generality. Research limitations/implications – There is a need to move away from the predominantly “single-item measure syndrome” that characterizes most of the available and compiled journal rankings in marketing. Practical implications – Broader approaches should be implemented and applied in journal rankings based upon “multi-item measures”. Originality/value – Re-assessment of the activity of ranking journals is long overdue if the ranking lists themselves do not consider a minimum of scientific rigor and soundness as required in other areas of scholarly endeavours. The marketing discipline may be at risk of entering a vicious and irreversible circle of decline and decomposition.