Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Electronic Commerce Research
Published in: Electronic Commerce Research 4/2020

19-10-2018

The value of backers’ word-of-mouth in crowdfunding projects filtering: an empirical investigation

Authors: Haichao Zheng, Zihao Qi, Xin Luo, Liting Li, Bo Xu

Published in: Electronic Commerce Research | Issue 4/2020

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The current study aims to investigate whether backers’ electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) is a valuable input when it comes to generating collective intelligence for projects filtering in crowdfunding. Based on theories of collective intelligence and WOM, we developed a research model and conducted an empirical study using a cross-section dataset with 845 crowdfunding projects and a panel dataset of the funding dynamics of those projects. The results indicated that backers’ negative WOM rather than positive WOM can effectively predict project implementation performance. Besides, for entrepreneurs with a high reputation, negative WOM has stronger predictive power for the complaints of product quality. We also found that projects with more accumulated negative WOM tend to attract fewer subsequent backers. Compared with positive WOM, negative WOM has a stronger effect on subsequent investments in a crowdfunding project. Finally, positive WOM can reduce the diffusion of responsibility effect in crowdfunding, that is, a backer is less likely to take responsibility for investing in a project when others have already backed it. Based on these findings, we conclude that backers’ WOM, especially the negative WOM, contributes to projects filtering in crowdfunding.
previous article When to launch a sales promotion for online fashion products? An empirical study
next article Situation awareness for recommender systems

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Literature
1.
Ahlers, G. K. C., Cumming, D. J., Gunther, C., & Schweizer, D. (2015). Signaling in equity crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(4), 955–980.
2.
Balboni, B., Kocollari, U., & Pais, I. (2014). How can social enterprises develop successful crowdfunding campaigns? An empirical analysis on Italian context. In The 14th EURAM conference, waves and winds of strategic leadership for sustainable competitiveness, Valencia, Spain.
3.
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370.
4.
Bechter, C., Jentzsch, S., & Michael, F. (2011). From wisdom to wisdom of the crowd and crowdfunding. Journal of Communication and Computer, 8(11), 951–957.
5.
Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2013). Individual crowdfunding practices. Venture Capital, 15(4), 313–333.
6.
Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2014). Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(5), 585–609.
7.
Berger, J. A., Sorensen, A. T., & Rasmussen, S. J. (2010). Positive effects of negative publicity: When negative reviews increase sales. Marketing Science, 29(5), 815–827.
8.
Bi, S., Liu, Z., & Usman, K. (2017). The influence of online information on investing decisions of reward-based crowdfunding. Journal of Business Research, 71(1), 10–18.
9.
Burtch, G., Ghose, A., & Wattal, S. (2013). An empirical examination of the antecedents and consequences of contribution patterns in crowd-funded markets. Information Systems Research, 24(3), 499–519.
10.
Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2013). Regression analysis of count data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11.
Cheung, C. M. K., & Thadani, D. R. (2012). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth communication: A literature analysis and integrative model. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 461–470.
12.
Cox, J., & Nguyen, T. (2018). Does the crowd mean business? An analysis of rewards-based crowdfunding as a source of finance for start-ups and small businesses. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 25(1), 147–162.
13.
Dellarocas, C., Zhang, X., & Awad, N. (2007). Exploring the value of online product reviews in forecasting sales: The case of motion pictures. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(4), 23–45.
14.
Duan, W., Gu, B., & Whinston, A. B. (2008). Do online reviews matter? An empirical investigation of panel data. Decision Support Systems, 45(4), 1007–1016.
15.
Gerber, E. M., Hui, J. S., & Kuo, P. Y. (2012). Crowdfunding: Why people are motivated to participate. Technical report, no. 2, Northwestern University, Segal Design Institute.
16.
Gleasure, R. (2015). Resistance to crowdfunding among entrepreneurs: An impression management perspective. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 24(4), 219–233.
17.
Gregg, D. G. (2010). Designing for collective intelligence. Communications of the ACM, 53(4), 134–138.
18.
Hausman, J. A., & Taylor, W. E. (1981). Panel data and unobservable individual effects. Econometrica, 49(6), 1377–1398.
19.
Hennigthurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the Internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38–52.
20.
Howe, J. (2008). Crowdsourcing: Why the power of the crowd is driving the future of business. New York: Crown Business.
21.
Jeppesen, L. B., & Lakhani, K. R. (2010). Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness in broadcast search. Organization Science, 21(5), 1016–1033.
22.
23.
Kim, K., & Viswanathan, S. (2016). The ‘experts’ in the crowd: The role of ‘expert’ investors in a crowdfunding market. In TPRC 41: The 41st research conference on communication, information and internet policy. SSRN: http://​ssrn.​com/​abstract=​2258243.
24.
Kittur, A., Nickerson, J. V., Bernstein, M., Gerber, E., Shaw, A., Zimmerman, J., et al. (2013). The future of crowd work. In International conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 1301–1318).
25.
King, A. J., Cheng, L., Starke, S., & Myatt, J. P. (2012). Is the true ‘wisdom of the crowd’ to copy successful individuals? Biology Letters, 8(2), 197–200.
26.
Klein, M., & Garcia, A. C. B. (2015). High-speed idea filtering with the bag of lemons. Decision Support Systems, 78(1), 39–50.
27.
Klein, M., & Convertino, G. (2015). A roadmap for open innovation systems. Journal of Social Media for Organizations, 2(1), 1–16.
28.
Kozinets, R. V., Valck, K. D., Wojnicki, A. C., & Sarah, J. S. (2010). Networked narratives: Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities. Journal of Marketing, 74(2), 71–89.
29.
30.
Kurvers, R., Wolf, M., Naguib, M., & Krause, J. (2015). Self-organized flexible leadership promotes collective intelligence in human groups. Royal Society Open Science, 2(12), 150222.
31.
Latane, B., & Darley, J. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help?. New York: Appleton-CneturyCrofts.
32.
Lin, M., Prabhala, N. R., & Viswanathan, S. (2016). Judging borrowers by the company they keep: Friendship networks and information asymmetry in online peer-to-peer lending. Management Science, 59(1), 17–35.
33.
Liu, L., Suh, A., & Wagner, C. (2018). Empathy or perceived credibility? An empirical study on individual donation behavior in charitable crowdfunding. Internet Research, 28(3), 623–651.
34.
Liu, Y. (2006). Word of mouth for movies: Its dynamics and impact on box office revenue. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 74–89.
35.
Lorenz, J., Rauhut, H., Schweitzer, F., & Helbing, D. (2011). How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect. PNAS, 108(22), 9020–9025.
36.
Malone, T. W., Laubacher, R., & Dellarocas, C. (2009). Harnessing crowds: Mapping the genome of collective intelligence. CCI working paper, no. 2009-001.
37.
Maxwell, J. A. (2008). Designing a qualitative study. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.), The Sage handbook of applied social research methods (pp. 214–253). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38.
Mollick, E. (2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1–16.
39.
Mollick, E., & Nanda, R. (2016). Wisdom or madness? Comparing crowds with expert evaluation in funding the arts. Management Science, 62(6), 1533–1553.
40.
Park, C., & Lee, T. M. (2009). Information direction, website reputation and eWOM effect: A moderating role of product type. Journal of Business Research, 62(1), 61–67.
41.
Paltoglou, G., & Thelwall, M. (2017). Sensing social media: A range of approaches for sentiment analysis. In J. Holyst (Ed.), Cyberemotions (pp. 97–117). New York: Springer.
42.
43.
Pope, N. D. (2011). Crowdfunding microstartups: It’s time for the securities and exchange commission to approve small offering. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Business Law, 13(4), 101–129.
44.
Qu, Z., Zhang, H., & Li, H. (2008). Determinants of online merchant rating: Content analysis of consumer comments about Yahoo merchants. Decision Support Systems, 46(1), 440–449.
45.
Siering, M., Koch, J. A., & Deokar, A. (2016). Detecting fraudulent behavior on crowdfunding platforms: The role of linguistic and content-based cues in static and dynamic contexts. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33(2), 421–455.
46.
Sher, P. J., & Lee, S. H. (2009). Consumer skepticism and online reviews: An elaboration likelihood model perspective. Social Behavior and Personality, 37(1), 137–143.
47.
Spence, M. (2002). Signaling in retrospect and the informational structure of markets. American Economic Review, 92(3), 434–459.
48.
Thies, F., Wessel, M., & Benlian, A. (2016). Effects of social interaction dynamics on platforms. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33(3), 843–873.
49.
Tomczak, A., & Brem, A. (2013). A conceptualized investment model of crowdfunding. Venture Capital, 15(4), 335–359.
50.
Wang, T., Liu, X., Kang, M., & Zheng, H. (2018). Exploring the determinants of fundraisers’ voluntary information disclosure on crowdfunding platforms: A risk-perception perspective. Online Information Review, 42(3), 324–342.
51.
Wang, Y., & Yu, C. (2015). Social interaction-based consumer decision-making model in social commerce: The role of word of mouth and observational learning. International Journal of Information Management, 37(3), 179–189.
52.
Wessel, M., Thies, F., & Benlian, A. (2016). The emergence and effects of fake social information: Evidence from crowdfunding. Decision Support Systems, 90(1), 75–85.
53.
Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., & Malone, T. W. (2010). Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330(6004), 686–688.
54.
Woolley, A. W., Aggarwal, I., & Malone, T. W. (2015). Collective intelligence and group performance. Psychological Science, 24(6), 420–424.
55.
Xu, B., Zheng, H., Xu, Y., & Wang, T. (2016). Configurational paths to sponsor satisfaction in crowdfunding. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 915–927.
56.
Yin, D., Mitra, S., & Zhang, H. (2012). Mechanisms of negativity bias: An empirical exploration of app reviews in Apple’s app store. In Thirty third international conference on information systems, Orlando, America.
57.
Zheng, H., Li, D., Wu, J., & Xu, Y. (2014). The role of multidimensional social capital in crowdfunding: A comparative study in China and US. Information & Management, 51(4), 488–496.
58.
Zheng, H., Wan, N., Chen, D., & Wang, T. (2014). Antecedents of project implementation success in crowdfunding. In Pacifc Asia conference on information systems, Chengdu, China.
59.
60.
Zwass, V. (2010). Co-creation: Toward a taxonomy and an integrated research perspective. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 15(1), 11–48.
Metadata
Title
The value of backers’ word-of-mouth in crowdfunding projects filtering: an empirical investigation
Authors
Haichao Zheng
Zihao Qi
Xin Luo
Liting Li
Bo Xu
Publication date
19-10-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Electronic Commerce Research / Issue 4/2020
Print ISSN: 1389-5753
Electronic ISSN: 1572-9362
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-018-9322-y

Other articles of this Issue 4/2020

Electronic Commerce Research 4/2020 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Allocating resources for a restaurant that serves regular and group-buying customers

OriginalPaper

Exploring contextual factors from consumer reviews affecting movie sales: an opinion mining approach

OriginalPaper

Content shared between banks and users on the social ecosystem: an inductive exploratory inquiry

OriginalPaper

How can social commerce be boosted? The impact of consumer behaviors on the information dissemination mechanism in a social commerce network

OriginalPaper

Appropriate timing for SMEs to introduce an Internet-based online channel under uncertain operating costs: a real options analysis

OriginalPaper

Smartphone use and income growth in rural China: empirical results and policy implications