Contest or Contract: Assessing the Effectiveness of Contests in Online Labor Markets

References

• Aggarwal CC, Zhai C, eds. (2012) Mining Text Data (Springer Science & Business Media, Boston).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ales L, Cho SH, Körpeoğlu E (2017) Optimal award scheme in innovation tournaments. Oper. Res. 65(3):693–702.Link, Google Scholar
• Ales L, Cho SH, Körpeoğlu E (2021) Innovation tournaments with multiple contributors. Production Oper. Management 30(6):1772–1784.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allon G, Babich V (2020) Crowdsourcing and crowdfunding in the manufacturing and services sectors. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 22(1):102–112.Link, Google Scholar
• Archak N (2010) Money, glory and cheap talk: Analyzing strategic behavior of contestants in simultaneous crowdsourcing contests on TopCoder.com. Rappa M, Jones P, Freire J, Chakrabarti S, eds. Proc. 19th Internat. Conf. World Wide Web, (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 21–30.Google Scholar
• Archak N, Ghose A, Ipeirotis PG (2011) Deriving the pricing power of product features by mining consumer reviews. Management Sci. 57(8):1485–1509.Link, Google Scholar
• Bockstedt J, Druehl C, Mishra A (2015) Problem-solving effort and success in innovation contests: The role of national wealth and national culture. J. Oper. Management 36(1):187–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bockstedt J, Druehl C, Mishra A (2016) Heterogeneous submission behavior and its implications for success in innovation contests with public submissions. Production Oper. Management 25(7):1157–1176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bockstedt J, Druehl C, Mishra A (2022) Incentives and stars: Competition in innovation contests with participant and submission visibility. Production Oper. Management 31(3):1372–1393.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ, Lacetera N, Lakhani KR (2011) Incentives and problem uncertainty in innovation contests: An empirical analysis. Management Sci. 57(5):843–863.Link, Google Scholar
• Caliendo M, Kopeinig S (2008) Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. J. Econom. Survey 22(1):31–72.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casas-Arce P, Martinez-Jerez FA (2009) Relative performance compensation, contests, and dynamic incentives. Management Sci. 55(8):1306–1320.Link, Google Scholar
• Chan J, Wang J (2017) Hiring preferences in online labor markets: Evidence of a female hiring bias. Management Sci. 64(7):2973–2994.Link, Google Scholar
• Chan KW, Li SY, Ni J, Zhu JJ (2021) What feedback matters? The role of experience in motivating crowdsourcing innovation. Production Oper. Management 30(1):103–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Che YK, Gale I (2003) Optimal design of research contests. Amer. Econom. Rev. 93(3):646–671.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen P, Pavlou P, Wu S, Yang Y (2021) Attracting high-quality contestants to contest in the context of crowdsourcing contest platform. Production Oper. Management 30(6):1751–1771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fan Q, Johnson N (2024) Contest schemes and dynamic incentive provision. Management Sci. 70(10):7265–7282.Link, Google Scholar
• Fei-Fei L, Fergus R, Perona P (2006) One-shot learning of object categories. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intelligence 28(4):594–611.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garcia SM, Tor A (2009) The N-effect: More competitors, less competition. Psych. Sci. 20(7):871–877.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Green JR, Stokey NL (1983) A comparison of tournaments and contracts. J. Political Econom. 91(3):349–364.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guyon I, Elisseeff A (2003) An introduction to variable and feature selection. J. Machine Learn. Res. 3(Mar):1157–1182.Google Scholar
• Hong Y, Pavlou PA (2017) On buyer selection of service providers in online outsourcing platforms for IT services. Inform. Systems Res. 28(3):547–562.Link, Google Scholar
• Hong Y, Wang C, Pavlou PA (2016) Comparing open and sealed bid auctions: Evidence from online labor markets. Inform. Systems Res. 27(1):49–69.Link, Google Scholar
• Horton JJ (2019) Buyer uncertainty about seller capacity: Causes, consequences, and a partial solution. Management Sci. 65(8):3518–3540.Link, Google Scholar
• Hsu DH (2006) Venture capitalists and cooperative start-up commercialization strategy. Management Sci. 52(2):204–219.Link, Google Scholar
• Hu M, Wang L (2021) Joint vs. separate crowdsourcing contests. Management Sci. 67(5):2711–2728.Link, Google Scholar
• Jian L, Yang S, Ba S, Lu L, Jiang LC (2019) Managing the crowds: The effect of prize guarantees and in-process feedback on participation in crowdsourcing contests. MIS Quart. 43(1):97–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang Z, Huang Y, Beil DR (2021) The role of problem specification in crowdsourcing contests for design problems: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 23(3):637–656.Link, Google Scholar
• Jiang Z, Huang Y, Beil DR (2022) The role of feedback in dynamic crowdsourcing contests: A structural empirical analysis. Management Sci. 68(7):4858–4877.Link, Google Scholar
• Kalra A, Shi M (2001) Designing optimal sales contests: A theoretical perspective. Marketing Sci. 20(2):170–193.Link, Google Scholar
• Kokkodis M, Ransbotham S (2022) Learning to successfully hire in online labor markets. Management Sci. 69(3):1323–1934.Google Scholar
• Körpeoğlu E, Cho S-H (2018) Incentives in contests with heterogeneous solvers. Management Sci. 64(6):2473–2972.Link, Google Scholar
• Körpeoğlu CG, Körpeoğlu E, Tunç S (2021) Optimal duration of innovation contests. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 23(3):657–675.Link, Google Scholar
• Lazear EP, Rosen S (1981) Rank-order tournaments as optimum labor contracts. J. Political Econom. 89(5):841–864.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Letina I, Liu S, Netzer N (2023) Optimal contest design: Tuning the heat. J. Econom. Theory 213:105616.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu TX, Yang J, Adamic LA, Chen Y (2014) Crowdsourcing with all-pay auctions: A field experiment on TaskCN. Management Sci. 60(8):2020–2037.Link, Google Scholar
• Marques O (2020) Machine learning with core ML. Image Processing and Computer Vision in iOS (Springer, Cham, Switzerland), 29–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Neufeld KH, Gaucher D (2017) Creativity and Innovation Dictionary. Dictionary for use with linguistic inquiry and word count software, Department of Psychology, University of Winnipeg.Google Scholar
• Pallais A (2014) Inefficient hiring in entry-level labor markets. Amer. Econom. Rev. 104(11):3565–3599.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rajkomar A, Oren E, Chen K, Dai AM, Hajaj N, Hardt M, Liu PJ, et al. (2018) Scalable and accurate deep learning with electronic health records. NPJ Digital Medicine 1(1):1–10.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sebastiani F (2002) Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Comput. Surveys 34(1):1–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sisak D (2009) Multiple‐prize contests–The optimal allocation of prizes. J. Econom. Surveys 23(1):82–114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stouras KI, Hutchison-Krupat J, Chao RO (2022) The role of participation in innovation contests. Management Sci. 68(6):4135–4150.Link, Google Scholar
• Sturman MC, Cheramie RA, Cashen LH (2005) The impact of job complexity and performance measurement on the temporal consistency, stability, and test-retest reliability of employee job performance ratings. J. Appl. Psych. 90(2):269–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Terwiesch C, Xu Y (2008) Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problem solving. Management Sci. 54(9):1529–1543.Link, Google Scholar
• Tian X, Shi J, Qi X (2022) Stochastic sequential allocations for creative crowdsourcing. Production Oper. Management 31(2):697–714.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wei Z, Lin M (2017) Market mechanisms in online peer-to-peer lending. Management Sci. 63(12):4236–4257.Link, Google Scholar
• Wooten JO, Ulrich KT (2017) Idea generation and the role of feedback: Evidence from field experiments with innovation tournaments. Production Oper. Management 26(1):80–99.Crossref, Google Scholar