Online crowdfunding has emerged as a powerful tool to raise funds for emergency response. Crowdfunding campaigns can use two transparency tools to attract donors: updates and certification. Updates are additional messages that the organizer issues after launching the campaign and are a form of operational transparency when they communicate the campaign’s work to donors. Alternatively, certification is a form of conventional transparency that ensures the campaign truly benefits a charitable purpose. Using an econometric analysis, we investigate the effects of transparency on donations. We study the direction of causality and mechanisms behind work‐related updates by conducting an experiment. Results from the econometric analysis using over 100,000 campaigns benefiting victims of emergencies reveal that both updates and certification have positive effects on donations. Each additional work‐related word in an update (operational transparency) increases donations on average by $65 per month, while certification (conventional transparency) raises funds on average by $22 per month. Results from the experiment confirm the direction of causality; posting work‐related updates in crowdfunding campaigns increases donations. Two mechanisms explain this effect: donors’ enhanced perceptions of effort and perceptions of trust.
Science is undergoing rapid change with the movement to improve science focused largely on reproducibility/replicability and open science practices. This moment of change—in which science turns inward to examine its methods and practices—provides an opportunity to address its historic lack of diversity and noninclusive culture. Through network modeling and semantic analysis, we provide an initial exploration of the structure, cultural frames, and women’s participation in the open science and reproducibility literatures (n = 2,926 articles and conference proceedings). Network analyses suggest that the open science and reproducibility literatures are emerging relatively independently of each other, sharing few common papers or authors. We next examine whether the literatures differentially incorporate collaborative, prosocial ideals that are known to engage members of underrepresented groups more than independent, winner-takes-all approaches. We find that open science has a more connected, collaborative structure than does reproducibility. Semantic analyses of paper abstracts reveal that these literatures have adopted different cultural frames: open science includes more explicitly communal and prosocial language than does reproducibility. Finally, consistent with literature suggesting the diversity benefits of communal and prosocial purposes, we find that women publish more frequently in high-status author positions (first or last) within open science (vs. reproducibility). Furthermore, this finding is further patterned by team size and time. Women are more represented in larger teams within reproducibility, and women’s participation is increasing in open science over time and decreasing in reproducibility. We conclude with actionable suggestions for cultivating a more prosocial and diverse culture of science.
Providing transparency into operational processes can change consumer and worker behavior. However, it is unclear whether operational transparency is beneficial with potentially biased service providers. We explore this in the context of ridesharing platforms where early evidence documents bias similar to what has been observed in traditional transportation systems. Platforms responded by reducing operational transparency through removing information about riders' gender and race from the ride request presented to drivers. However, following this change, bias may still manifest through driver cancelation after a request is accepted, at which point the rider's picture is displayed. Our primary research question is to what extent a rider's gender, race, and perception of support for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights impact cancelation rates. We investigate this through a large field experiment on a major ridesharing platform in Washington, DC. By manipulating rider names and profile pictures, we observe drivers' behavior patterns in accepting and canceling rides. Our results confirm that bias at the ride request stage has been eliminated. However, after acceptance, racial and LGBT biases are persistent, while we find no evidence of gender biases. We also explore whether peak times moderate (through increased pay to drivers) or exacerbate (by signaling that there are many riders, allowing drivers to be more selective) these biases. We find a moderating effect of peak timing, with lower cancelation rates for non-caucasian riders. We do not find a similar moderating effect for riders that signal support for the LGBT community.
Providing transparency into operational processes can change consumer and worker behavior. However, it is unclear whether operational transparency is beneficial with potentially biased service providers. We explore this in the context of ridesharing platforms where early evidence documents bias similar to what has been observed in traditional transportation systems. Platforms responded by reducing operational transparency through removing information about riders' gender and race from the ride request presented to drivers. However, following this change, bias may still manifest through driver cancelation after a request is accepted, at which point the rider's picture is displayed. Our primary research question is to what extent a rider's gender, race, and perception of support for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights impact cancelation rates. We investigate this through a large field experiment on a major ridesharing platform in Washington, DC. By manipulating rider names and profile pictures, we observe drivers' behavior patterns in accepting and canceling rides. Our results confirm that bias at the ride request stage has been eliminated. However, after acceptance, racial and LGBT biases are persistent, while we find no evidence of gender biases. We also explore whether peak times moderate (through increased pay to drivers) or exacerbate (by signaling that there are many riders, allowing drivers to be more selective) these biases. We find a moderating effect of peak timing, with lower cancelation rates for non-caucasian riders. We do not find a similar moderating effect for riders that signal support for the LGBT community.
Hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) manifest a limited self-renewal capacity, as determined by a surrogate assay involving replating capacity of single colonies in vitro with generation of secondary colonies. Stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF-1/CXCL12), has been implicated in regulation of hematopoiesis through its modulation of hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) and HPC migration, homing, mobilization, and survival. We used bone marrow cells from SDF-1/CXCL12 transgenic and littermate control mice, and culture of normal mouse bone marrow and human cord blood cells plated in the presence or absence of recombinant SDF-1/CXCL12 to evaluate a role for SDF-1/CXCL12 in the replating capability in vitro of multipotential [colony-forming units (CFU)-GEMM] and macrophage (CFU-M) progenitor cells. Competitive repopulating capacity of mouse HSCs was assessed in lethally irradiated mice. Transgenic or exogenous SDF-1/CXCL12 significantly enhanced numbers of secondary colonies formed from primary CFU-GEMM or CFU-M colonies. In the limited setting of our in vivo studies, the SDF-1/CXCL12 transgene did not influence HSC competitive repopulation. However, the results suggest that SDF-1/CXCL12 enhances in vitro replating/self-renewal of HPCs, which may contribute to myelopoiesis in vivo. This information may be of value to ex vivo expansion of HPCs/HSCs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.