Paper detail

How does Observational Learning Impact Crowdfunding Outcomes for Backers, Project Creators and Platforms?

Reward-based crowdfunding platforms are becoming increasingly popular to finance projects proposing innovative products, e.g., Kickstarter. One important challenge of this form of financing is the uncertainty in the quality of projects. To mitigate the negative effects of this uncertainty for backers, platforms share information regarding the decisions of earlier backers visiting the project campaign pages. This allows backers not only to rely on their expertise to identify project qualities but also to learn from the decisions of their fellow backers who might be more informed. Current studies on observational learning (OL) in crowdfunding mainly focus on predicting the success chances of projects, and there is a lack of understanding of how OL affects crowdfunding dynamics for backers, project creators and platforms. This paper aims to fill this gap by using a theoretical OL model involving two projects competing for funding from backers who may have differentiated expertness in identifying project quality. By introducing various performance measures for backers, creators and platforms and comparing these measures under OL to the case without learning, we provide a thorough analysis of how OL impacts crowdfunding outcomes. We find that information sharing and OL always benefit backers, especially when the early backers are experts. Regarding the impact of OL on creators and platforms, our analysis reveals two understudied but important aspects: the tightness of the competition for projects according to the availability of funding, and the quality difference among the proposed projects. Additionally, we investigate how OL affects the quality decisions of creators and show that OL increases the incentive for high-quality products, especially in situations where funding is scarce.

preprint2024arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.