2014
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2524910
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Community Impact on Crowdfunding Performance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Subsequently, we suggest future research to further investigate the crowd backing a project, answering who is the crowd and 'which' crowd must be attracted. This question has already been approached by a few previous studies (Inbar & Barzilay, 2014;Steigenberger, 2017;Zhang & Chen, 2019a), however, a fine-grained quantitative analysis of the individuals backing crowdfunding projects considering the funding goal a moderating determinant for project success remains desired.…”
Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subsequently, we suggest future research to further investigate the crowd backing a project, answering who is the crowd and 'which' crowd must be attracted. This question has already been approached by a few previous studies (Inbar & Barzilay, 2014;Steigenberger, 2017;Zhang & Chen, 2019a), however, a fine-grained quantitative analysis of the individuals backing crowdfunding projects considering the funding goal a moderating determinant for project success remains desired.…”
Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Funders' relationships with a support-based crowdfunding platform display slightly more variety. Recent studies have revealed that most funders using support-based platforms back only one project (Inbar & Barzilay, 2014;Marom & Sade, 2013). Although these one-time funders, who usually have a personal attachment to a specific project, are in the vast majority, repeat funders play a significant part for the platform.…”
Section: Frequency Of Interactionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In an important development, one also finds hybrid sites, which encompass multiple funding mechanisms. Most studies have focused on large-scale platforms of this nature, such as Kickstarter, where the variety of project categories and rewards is huge (e.g., Hahn & Lee, 2013;Inbar & Barzilay, 2014;Kuppuswamy & Bayus, 2015;Lin, Boh, & Goh, 2014;Marom & Sade, 2013;Mollick, 2014). One might expect the funders and applicants involved with these platforms to be quite heterogeneous in their motivations and, therefore, not representative of the entire crowdfunding landscape.…”
Section: Platform-internal Decision-makingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Rogers (2003), polymorphism is "the degree to which an individual acts as an opinion leader for a variety of topics," while monomorphism "is the tendency for an individual to act as an opinion leader for only a single topic" (p. 314). Prior research has argued that interest concentration can indicate whether the crowdfunder is knowledgeable and experienced in certain areas (Hahn & Lee, 2013;March, 1991), and can be associated with considerable diversity in patterns of participation (Inbar & Barzilay, 2014). Distinguishing between monomorphics and polymorphics can help us identify opinion leaders whose influence span multiple areas (King & Summers, 1970;Silk, 1966).…”
Section: Interest Concentrationmentioning
confidence: 99%