Purpose – This research is based upon the assumption that the empirical research designs and the scientific identity of a journal are related. The objective is to review and evaluate the empirical research design of papers to determine the scientific identity of a selection of academic marketing journals.Design/methodology/approach – The journal sample consists of the Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), the European Journal of Marketing (EJM) and the Journal of Marketing (JM). The review and evaluation considers a six‐year period, namely 2000‐2005. The content analysis consisted of 811 papers.Findings – The scientific identity of JM may be seen as built upon quantitative research designs and the North American paradigm of research values. The scientific identity of AMJ is based upon a mix of empirical research designs and the Australian paradigm of research values. The scientific identity of EJM is also based upon a mix of empirical research designs, but a multi‐continental paradigm of research values.Research limitations/implications – The leading continental journals in marketing maintain a scientific identity based upon the continental paradigm of research values. If it is driven to the extremes, a paradigmatic myopia and inertia of research designs may evolve that limit the scientific identity to be dogmatic and narrow‐focused rather than variable and broad‐focused.Originality/value – A cross‐continental review and evaluation of research designs and scientific identity of academic marketing journals is presented.