Rate or Trade? Identifying Winning Ideas in Open Idea Sourcing

References

• Afuah A, Tucci C (2012) Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Acad. Management Rev. 37(3):355–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amabile TM (1996) Creativity in Context. Update to Social Psychology of Creativity (Westview Press, Boulder, CO).Google Scholar
• Arrow KJ, Forsythe R, Gorham M, Hahn R, Ledyard JO, Levmore S, Litan Ret al. (2008) The promise of prediction markets. Sci. 320(5878):877–878.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bagozzi RP, Yi Y (1988) On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 16(1):74–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baron RM, Kenny DA (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 51(6): 1173–1182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berg H, Proebsting TA (2009) Hanson’s automated market maker. J. Prediction Markets 3(1):45–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blohm I, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2013) Crowdsourcing: How to benefit from (too) many great ideas. MIS Quart. Executive 12(4):199–211.Google Scholar
• Blohm I, Bretschneider U, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2011a) Does collaboration among participants lead to better ideas in IT-based idea competitions? An empirical investigation. Internat. J. Networking Virtual Organ. 9(2):106–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blohm I, Riedl C, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2011b) Idea evaluation mechanisms for collective intelligence in open innovation communities: Do traders outperform raters? Proc. Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (ICIS’11), Shanghai.Google Scholar
• Boudreau K, Guinan E, Lakhani K, Riedl C (2016) Looking across and looking beyond the knowledge frontier: Intellectual distance and resource allocation in science. Management Sci. ePub ahead of print January 8, http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2285.Link, Google Scholar
• Boudreau K, Gaule P, Lakhani KR, Riedl C, Woolley AW (2014) From crowds to collaborators: Initiating effort and catalyzing interactions among online creative workers. Working Paper 14-060, Harvard Business School, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Campbell DT, Fiske DW (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psych. Bull. 56(2): 81–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chalmers PA (2003) The role of cognitive theory in human-computer interface. Comput. Human Behav. 19(5):593–607.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen L, Goes P, Marsden JR, Zhang Z (2009) Design and use of preference markets for evaluation of early stage technologies. J. Management Inform. Systems 26(3):45–70.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2003) Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ).Google Scholar
• Compeau D, Marcolin BL, Kelley H, Higgins C (2012) Generalizability of information systems research using students—A reflection on our practices and recommendations for future research. Inform. Systems Res. 23(4):1093–1109.Link, Google Scholar
• Cowgill B, Zitzewitz E (2015) Corporate prediction markets: Evidence from Google, Ford, and Firm X. Rev. Econom. Stud. 86(4):1309–1341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Daft RL, Macintosh NB (1981) A tentative exploration into the amount and equivocality of information processing in organizational work units. Admin. Sci. Quart. 26(2):207–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dahan E, Soukhoroukova A, Spann M (2010) New product development 2.0: Preference markets how scalable securities markets identify winning product concepts and attributes. J. Product Innovation Management 27(2):937–954.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dahan E, Kim AJ, Lo AW, Poggio T, Chan N (2011) Securities trading of concepts (STOC). J. Marketing Res. 48(3):497–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dani V, Madani O, Pennock D, Sanghai S, Galebach B (2006) An empirical comparison of algorithms for aggregating expert predictions. Dechter R, Richardson T, eds. Proc. 22nd Conf. Uncertainty Artificial Intelligence (UAI) (AUAI Press, Arlington, VA), 106–113.Google Scholar
• Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart. 13(3):319–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dean DL, Hender JM, Rodgers TL, Santanen EL (2006) Identifying quality, novel, and creative ideas: Constructs and scales for idea evaluation. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 7(10):646–698.Google Scholar
• Dennis AR, Wixom BH (2001) Investigating the moderators of the group support systems use with meta-analysis. J. Management Inform. Systems 18(3):235–257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Di Gangi PM, Wasko MM (2009) Steal my idea! Organizational adoption of user innovations from a user innovation community: A case study of Dell IdeaStorm. Decision Support Systems 48(1):303–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dimoka A, Banker RD, Benbasat I, Davis FD, Dennis AR, Gefen D, Gupta Aet al. (2012) On the use of neurophysiological tools in IS research: Developing a research agenda for NeuroIS. MIS Quart. 36(3):679–702.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DuBay WH (2004) The Principles of Readability (Impact Information, Costa Mesa, CA).Google Scholar
• Easley D, Kleinberg J (2010) Networks, Crowds, and Markets: Reasoning About a Highly Connected World (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Einhorn HJ, Hogarth RM (1981) Behavioral decision theory: Processes of judgment and choice. J. Accounting Res. 19(1):1–31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Estellés-Arolas E, González-Ladrón-de-Guevara F (2012) Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition. J. Inform. Sci. 38(2):189–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Forman C, Zeebroeck NV (2012) From wires to partners: How the Internet has fostered R&D collaborations within firms. Management Sci. 58(8):1549–1568.Link, Google Scholar
• Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Marketing Res. 18(2):39–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Franke N, Shah S (2003) How communities support innovative activities: An exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users. Res. Policy 32(1):157–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Füller J, Mühlbacher H, Matzler K, Jawecki G (2009) Consumer empowerment through Internet-based co-creation. J. Management Inform. Systems 26(3):71–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gefen D, Straub D (2000) The relative importance of perceived ease of use in IS adoption: A study of e-commerce adoption. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 1(8):1–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghose A, Ipeirotis PG (2011) Estimating the helpfulness and economic impact of product reviews: Mining text and reviewer characteristics. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Engrg. 23(10):1498–1512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Girotra K, Terwiesch C, Ulrich KT (2010) Idea generation and the quality of the best idea. Management Sci. 56(4):591–605.Link, Google Scholar
• Goodwin P, Lawton R (1999) On the asymmetry of the symmetric MAPE. Internat. J. Forecasting 15(4):405–408.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haerem T, Rau D (2007) The influence of degree of expertise and objective task complexity on perceived task complexity and performance. J. Appl. Psych. 92(5):1320–1331.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2010) Multivariate Data Analysis (Pearson, Boston).Google Scholar
• Hanson R (2003) Combinatorial information market design. Inform. Systems Frontiers 5(1):107–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hammedi W, van Riel ACR, Sasovova Z (2011) Antecedents and consequences of reflexivity in new product idea screening. J. Product Innovation Management 28(5):662–679.Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Hildebrand C, Häubl G, Herrmann A, Landwehr JR (2013) When social media can be bad for you: Community feedback stifles consumer creativity and reduces satisfaction with self-designed products. Inform. Systems Res. 24(1):14–29.Link, Google Scholar
• Jones Q, Ravid G, Rafaeli S (2004) Information overload and the message dynamics of online interaction spaces: A theoretical model and empirical exploration. Inform. Systems Res. 15(2): 194–210.Link, Google Scholar
• Kalyuga S (2011) Cognitive load theory: How many types of load does it really need? Ed. Psych. Rev. 23(1):1–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kamp G, Koen PA (2009) Improving the idea screening process within organizations using prediction markets: A theoretical perspective. J. Prediction Markets 3(2):39–64.Google Scholar
• Karahanna E, Agarwal R, Angst CM (2006) Reconceptualizing compatibility beliefs in technology acceptance research. MIS Quart. 30(4):781–804.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King R, Smith V, Williams A, van Boening M (1993) The robustness of bubbles and crashes in experimental stock markets. Day RH, Chen P, eds. Nonlinear Dynamics and Evolutionary Economics (Oxford, New York), 183–200.Google Scholar
• Klare GR (1963) Measurement of Readability (Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA).Google Scholar
• Kornish LJ, Ulrich KT (2014) The importance of the raw idea in innovation: Testing the sow’s ear hypothesis. J. Marketing Res. 51(1):14–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kühberger A, Gradl P (2013) Choice, rating, and ranking: Framing effects with different response modes. J. Behav. Decision Making 26(2):109–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• LaComb AC, Barnett A, Pan Q (2007) The imagination market. Inform. Systems Frontiers 9(2–3):245–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR, Boudreau KJ, Loh P-R, Backstrom L, Baldwin C, Lonstein E, Lydon M, MacCormack A, Arnaout RA, Guinan EC (2013) Prize-based contests can provide solutions to computational biology problems. Nature Biotechnology 31(7):108–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leimeister JM, Huber M, Bretschneider U, Krcmar H (2009) Leveraging crowdsourcing—Activation-supporting components for IT-based idea competitions. J. Management Inform. Systems 26(1):197–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Limayem M, DeSanctis G (2000) Providing decisional guidance for multicriteria decision making in groups. Inform. Systems Res. 11(4):386–401.Link, Google Scholar
• Lorenz J, Rauhut H, Schweitzer F, Helbing D (2011) How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 108(22):9020–9025.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luckner S, Weinhardt C (2007) How to pay traders in information markets: Results from a field experiment. J. Prediction Markets 1(2):147–156.Google Scholar
• Lyytinen K, King JL (2004) Nothing at the center?: Academic legitimacy in the information systems field. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 5(6):220–247.Google Scholar
• Mayer RE, Moreno R (2003) Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Ed. Psych. 38(1):43–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Michalke ME (2015) koRpus: An R package for text analysis. Accessed February 17, 2016, https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/koRpus/index.html.Google Scholar
• Moore WL (2004) A cross-validity comparison of rating-based and choice-based conjoint analysis models. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 21(3):299–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morgan DL (1996) Focus Groups as Qualitative Research (Sage, Thousands Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Muchnik L, Aral S, Taylor SJ (2013) Social influence bias: A randomized experiment. Sci. 341(6146):647–651.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Muller D, Judd CM, Yzerbyt VY (2005) When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 89(6): 852–863.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nowlis SM, Simonson I (1997) Attribute-task compatibility as a determinant of consumer preference reversals. J. Marketing Res. 34(2):205–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Leary DE (2013) Internal corporate prediction markets: “From each according to his bet.” Internat. J. Accounting Inform. Systems 14(1):89–103.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Olshavsky RW, Spreng RA (1996) An exploratory study of the innovation evaluation process. J. Product Innovation Management 13(6):512–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ozer M (2005) Factors which influence decision making in new product evaluation. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 163(3):784–801.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paas F, Tuovinen J, Tabers H, van Gerven P (2003) Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Ed. Psych. 38(1):63–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paas FG, Van Merriënboer JJ (1994) Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: A cognitive-load approach. J. Ed. Psych. 86(1):122–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne JW, Bettman JR, Coupey E, Johnson EJ (1992) A constructive process view of decision making: Multiple strategies in judgment and choice. Acta Psych. 80(1–3):107–141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Rucker DD, Hayes AF (2007) Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behav. Res. 42(1):185–227.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Riedl C, Blohm I, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2010) Rating scales for collective intelligence in innovation communities: Why quick and easy decision making does not get it right. Proc. Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (ICIS’10), St. Louis, 1–21.Google Scholar
• Riedl C, Blohm I, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2013) The effect of rating scales on decision quality and user attitudes in online innovation communities. Internat. J. Electronic Commerce 17(3):7–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Runco MA, Smith WR (1992) Interpersonal and intrapersonal evaluations of creative ideas. Personality Individual Differences 13(3): 295–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saadé GR, Otrakji CA (2007) First impressions last a lifetime: Effect of interface type on disorientation and cognitive load. Comput. Human Behav. 23(1):525–535.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Servan-Schreiber E, Wolfers J, Pennock DM, Galebach B (2004) Prediction markets: Does money matter? Electronic Markets 14(3): 243–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shaft TM, Vessey I (2006) The role of cognitive fit in the relationship between software comprehension and modification. MIS Quart. 30(1):29–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shrout PE, Bolger N (2002) Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psych. Methods 7(4):422–445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Slamka C, Jank W, Skiera B (2012) Second-generation prediction markets for information aggregation: A comparison of payoff mechanisms. J. Forecasting 31(1):469–489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soukhoroukova A, Spann M, Skiera B (2012) Sourcing, filtering, and evaluating new product ideas: An empirical exploration of the performance of idea markets. J. Product Innovation Management 29(1):100–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spann M, Skiera B (2003) Internet-based virtual stock markets for business forecasting. Management Sci. 49(10):1310–1326.Link, Google Scholar
• Spears B, LaComb C, Interrante J, Barnett J, Senturk-Dogonaksoy D (2009) Examining trader behavior in idea markets: An implementation of GE’s imagination markets. J. Prediction Markets 3(1):17–39.Google Scholar
• Speier C (2006) The influence of information presentation formats on complex task decision-making performance. Internat. J. Human-Comput. Stud. 64(11):1115–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sujan M (1985) Consumer knowledge: Effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments. J. Consumer Res. 12(1):31–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sweller J (1988) Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Sci. 12(2):257–285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sweller J, van Merrienboer J, Paas F (1998) Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Ed. Psych. Rev. 10(3):251–296.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tan H-T, Ying Wang E, Zhou BO (2014) When the use of positive language backfires: The joint effect of tone, readability, and investor sophistication on earnings judgments. J. Accounting Res. 52(1):273–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tilson D, Lyytinen K, Sörensen C (2010) Digital infrastructures: The missing IS research agenda. Inform. Systems Res. 21(4):748–759.Link, Google Scholar
• Todd P, Benbasat I (1999) Evaluating the impact of DSS, cognitive effort, and incentives on strategy selection. Inform. Systems Res. 10(4):356–374.Link, Google Scholar
• Van Merrienboer JJG, Kirschner PA, Kester L (2003) Taking the load off a learner’s mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Ed. Psych. 38(1):5–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vessey I, Dennis G (1991) Cognitive fit: An empirical study of information acquisition. Inform. Systems Res. 2(1):63–84.Link, Google Scholar
• Von Hippel E (2005) Democratizing Innovation (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Witten IH, Frank E, Hall MA (2011) Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques (Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington, MA).Google Scholar
• Wolfers J, Zitzewitz E (2004) Prediction markets. J. Econom. Perspective 18(2):107–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Woolley A, Chabris CF, Pentland A, Hashmi N, Malone TW (2010) Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Sci. 330(6004):686–688.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhao Y, Zhu Q (2014) Evaluation on crowdsourcing research: Current status and future direction. Inform. Systems Frontiers 16(3): 417–434.Crossref, Google Scholar