Crowdfunding Success Factors: A Meta-Analytic Investigation

References

• Agrawal AK, Catalini C, Goldfarb A (2011) The geography of crowdfunding. NBER Working Paper No. 16820, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Ahlers GKC, Cumming D, Günther C, Schweizer D (2015) Signaling in equity crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 39(4):955–980.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alexiou K, Wiggins J, Preece SB (2020) Crowdfunding acts as a funding substitute and a legitimating signal for nonprofit performing arts organizations. Nonprofit Voluntary Sector Quart. 49(4):827–848.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allison TH, Davis BC, Short JC, Webb JW (2015) Crowdfunding in a prosocial microlending environment: Examining the role of intrinsic versus extrinsic cues. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 39(1):53–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allison TH, Davis BC, Webb JW, Short JC (2017) Persuasion in crowdfunding: An elaboration likelihood model of crowdfunding performance. J. Bus. Venturing 32(6):707–725.Crossref, Google Scholar
• André K, Bureau S, Gautier A, Rubel O (2017) Beyond the opposition between altruism and self-interest: Reciprocal giving in reward-based crowdfunding. J. Bus. Ethics 146(2):313–332.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anglin AH, Wolfe MT, Short JC, McKenny AF, Pidduck RJ (2018a) Narcissistic rhetoric and crowdfunding performance: A social role theory perspective. J. Bus. Venturing 33(6):780–812.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anglin AH, Short JC, Drover W, Stevenson RM, McKenny AF, Allison TH (2018b) The power of positivity? The influence of positive psychological capital language on crowdfunding performance. J. Bus. Venturing 33(4):470–492.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ba Z, Zhao YC, Song S, Zhu Q (2021) Understanding the determinants of online medical crowdfunding project success in China. Inform. Processing Management 58(2):102465.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ba Z, Zhao YC, Song S, Zhu Q (2022) Does the involvement of charities matter? Exploring the impact of charities’ reputation and social capital on medical crowdfunding performance. Inform. Processing Management 59(3):102942.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bass FM (2004) A new product growth for model consumer durables. Management Sci. 50(12_supplement):1825–1832.Link, Google Scholar
• Bass FM, Krishnan TV, Jain DC (1994) Why the Bass model fits without decision variables. Marketing Sci. 13(3):203–223.Link, Google Scholar
• Battaglia F, Busato F, Manganiello M (2022) A cross-platform analysis of the equity crowdfunding Italian context: The role of intellectual capital. Electronic Commerce Res. 22(2):649–689.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beier M, Wagner K (2015) Crowdfunding success: A perspective from social media and e-commerce. Proc. 36th Internat. Conf. Information Systems (Association for Information Systems, Atlanta), 11.Google Scholar
• Bengtson B (2019) A comparative study on the effect of environmental social value statements on crowdfunding success across various crowdfunding platforms. Working paper, Christian University, Fort Worth, TX.Google Scholar
• Bernardino S, Santos JF, Oliveira S (2021) The impact of social media and e-WOM on the success of reward-based crowdfunding campaigns. Cuadernos de Gestión 21(2):35–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borst I, Moser C, Ferguson J (2018) From friendfunding to crowdfunding: Relevance of relationships, social media, and platform activities to crowdfunding performance. New Media Soc. 20(4):1396–1414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bukhari FAS, Usman SM, Usman M, Hussain K (2020) The effects of creator credibility and backer endorsement in donation crowdfunding campaigns success. Baltic J. Management 15(2):215–235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burke QL (2019) Determinants of securities crowdfunding success under SEC regulation crowdfunding. Working paper, Farmer School of Business, Miami University, Miami.Google Scholar
• Butticè V, Colombo MG, Wright M (2017) Serial crowdfunding, social capital, and project success. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 41(2):183–207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Calic G, Mosakowski E (2016) Kicking off social entrepreneurship: How a sustainability orientation influences crowdfunding success. J. Management Stud. 53(5):738–767.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cappa F, Pinelli M, Maiolini R, Leone MI (2021) Pledge” me your ears! The role of narratives and narrator experience in explaining crowdfunding success. Small Bus. Econom. 57(2):953–973.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chaiken S, Trope Y (1999) Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Chan CSR, Parhankangas A (2017) Crowdfunding innovative ideas: How incremental and radical innovativeness influence funding outcomes. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 41(2):237–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Zhang W, Yan X, Jin J (2020) The life-cycle influence mechanism of the determinants of financing performance: An empirical study of a Chinese crowdfunding platform. Rev. Management Sci. 14(1):287–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Zhou S, Jin W, Chen S (2023) Investigating the determinants of medical crowdfunding performance: A signaling theory perspective. Internet Res. 33(3):1134–1156.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chliova M, Brinckmann J, Rosenbusch N (2015) Is microcredit a blessing for the poor? A meta-analysis examining development outcomes and contextual considerations. J. Bus. Venturing 30(3):467–487.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cho M, Kim G (2017) A cross-cultural comparative analysis of crowdfunding projects in the United States and South Korea. Comput. Human Behav. 72:312–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cicchiello AFF, Kazemikhasragh A (2022) Tackling gender bias in equity crowdfunding: An exploratory study of investment behaviour of Latin American investors. Eur. Bus. Rev. 34(3):370–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coakley J, Lazos A, Liñares-Zegarra J (2018) Follow-on equity crowdfunding. Working paper, Essex Business School, University of Essex, Essex, UK.Google Scholar
• Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Ed. Psych. Measurement 20(1):37–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Colombo MG, Franzoni C, Rossi-Lamastra C (2015) Internal social capital and the attraction of early contributions in crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 39(1):75–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cornelius PB, Gokpinar B (2020) The role of customer investor involvement in crowdfunding success. Management Sci. 66(1):452–472.Link, Google Scholar
• Courtney C, Dutta S, Li Y (2017) Resolving information asymmetry: Signaling, endorsement, and crowdfunding success. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 41(2):265–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cram WA, D’Arcy J, Proudfoot JG (2019) Seeing the forest and the trees: A meta-analysis of the antecedents to information security policy compliance. MIS Quart. 43(2):525–554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cumming DJ, Leboeuf G, Schwienbacher A (2020) Crowdfunding models: Keep-it-all vs. all-or-nothing. Financial Management 49(2):331–360.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deng L, Ye Q, Xu D, Sun W, Jiang G (2022) A literature review and integrated framework for the determinants of crowdfunding success. Financial Innovation 8:41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doi SAR, Barendregt JJ, Khan S, Thalib L, Williams GM (2015) Advances in the meta-analysis of heterogeneous clinical trials I: The inverse variance heterogeneity model. Contemporary Clinical Trials 45(Part A):130–138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisend M (2015) Have we progressed marketing knowledge? A meta-meta-analysis of effect sizes in marketing research. J. Marketing 79(3):23–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisend M (2019) Explaining digital piracy: A meta-analysis. Inform. Systems Res. 30(2):636–664.Link, Google Scholar
• Evers M (2012) Main drivers of crowdfunding success: A conceptual framework and empirical analysis. Unpublished master’s thesis, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, Netherlands.Google Scholar
• Felipe IJDS, Ferreira BCF (2020) Determinants of the success of equity crowdfunding campaigns. Revista Contabilidade Finanças 31(84):560–573.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frydrych D, Bock AJ, Kinder T, Koeck B (2014) Exploring entrepreneurial legitimacy in reward-based crowdfunding. Venture Capital 16(3):247–269.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gafni H, Hudon M, Périlleux A (2021) Business or basic needs? The impact of loan purpose on social crowdfunding platforms. J. Bus. Ethics 173(4):777–793.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Geiger M, Moore K (2022) Attracting the crowd in online fundraising: A meta-analysis connecting campaign characteristics to funding outcomes. Comput. Human Behav. 128(March):107061.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gorbatai A, Nelson L (2015) The narrative advantage: Gender and the language of crowdfunding. Working paper, Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley.Google Scholar
• Greenberg J, Mollick E (2017) Activist choice homophily and the crowdfunding of female founders. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(2):341–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guo L, Zhou D, Chen Y, Huy R (2015) Platform strategy and market response impact on the success of crowdfunding: A Chinese case. Asian J. Innovation Policy 4(3):397–409.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ho HC, Chiu CL, Mansumitrchai S, Yuan Z, Zhao N, Zou J (2021) The influence of signals on donation crowdfunding campaign success during COVID-19 crisis. Internat. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18(14):7715.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong H, Xu D, Wang GA, Fan W (2017) Understanding the determinants of online review helpfulness: A meta-analytic investigation. Decision Support Systems 102(October):1–11.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsieh HC, Hsieh YC, Vu THC (2019) How social movements influence crowdfunding success. Pacific-Basin Finance J. 53(February):308–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iyer R, Khwaja AI, Luttmer EFP, Shue K (2013) Screening peers softly: Inferring the quality of small borrowers. Working paper, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.Google Scholar
• Iyer R, Khwaja AI, Luttmer EFP, Shue K (2016) Screening peers softly: Inferring the quality of small borrowers. Management Sci. 62(6):1554–1577.Link, Google Scholar
• Jiang C, Han R, Xu Q (2023) The impact of social media input intensity on reward-based crowdfunding performance: Evidence from China. Electronic Commerce Res. 23(3):1753–1774.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang C, Han R, Xu Q, Liu Y (2020) The impact of soft information extracted from descriptive text on crowdfunding performance. Electronic Commerce Res. Appl. 43:101002.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang Y, Ho YCC, Yan X, Tan Y (2022) What’s in a “username”? The effect of perceived anonymity on herding in crowdfunding. Inform. Systems Res. 33(1):1–17.Link, Google Scholar
• Joenssen DW, Michaelis A, Müllerleile T (2014) Link to new product preannouncement: Success factors in crowdfunding. Working paper, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics, Ilmenau University of Technology, Ilmenau, Germany.Google Scholar
• Jung EJ, Susarla A, Sambamurthy V (2015) Community engagement and collective evaluation in crowdfunding. Working paper, Eli Broad College of Business, Michigan State University, East Lansing.Google Scholar
• Kaartemo V (2017) The elements of a successful crowdfunding campaign: A systematic literature review of crowdfunding performance. Internat. Rev. Entrepreneurship 15(3):291–318.Google Scholar
• Kepes S, Banks GC, McDaniel M, Whetzel DL (2012) Publication bias in the organizational sciences. Organ. Res. Methods 15(4):624–662.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim PH, Buffart M, Croidieu G (2016) TMI: Signaling credible claims in crowdfunding campaign narratives. Group Organ. Management 41(6):717–750.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim T, Por MH, Yang SB (2017) Winning the crowd in online fundraising platforms: The roles of founder and project features. Electronic Commerce Res. Appl. 25:86–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kincaid PA, Short JC, Wolfe MT (2022) Got ink, get paid? Exploring the impact of tattoo visibility on crowdfunding performance. J. Bus. Venturing Insights 17:e00317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koch JA, Siering M (2015) Crowdfunding success factors: The characteristics of successfully funded projects on crowdfunding platforms. Proc. 23rd Eur. Conf. Inform. Systems (Association for Information Systems, Atlanta), 106.Google Scholar
• Kohli R, Devaraj S (2003) Measuring information technology payoff: A meta-analysis of structural variables in firm-level empirical research. Inform. Systems Res. 14(2):127–145.Link, Google Scholar
• Kromidha E, Robson P (2016) Social identity and signalling success factors in online crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Regional Development 28(9–10):605–629.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakatos I (1977) Lakatos: The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes: Philosophical Papers Volume 1 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leboeuf G (2016) Does the crowd forgive? Working paper, SKEMA Business School, Université de Lille, Euralille, France.Google Scholar
• Lee CH, Bian Y, Karaouzene R, Suleiman N (2019) Examinings the role of narratives in civic crowdfunding: Linguistic style and message substance. Indust. Management Data Systems 119(7):1492–1514.Google Scholar
• Lelo de Larrea G, Altin M, Singh D (2019) Determinants of success of restaurant crowdfunding. Internat. J. Hospitality Management 78:150–158.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. J. Clinical Epidemiology 62(10):e1–e34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lin M, Viswanathan S (2016) Home bias in online investments: An empirical study of an online crowdfunding market. Management Sci. 62(5):1393–1414.Link, Google Scholar
• Lipsey MW, Wilson DB (2001) Practical Meta-Analysis (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Liu Z, Ben S, Zhang R (2023) Factors affecting crowdfunding success. J. Comput. Inform. Systems 63(2):241–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lui SS, Zhu Z, Liu J (2023) Success of crowdfunding: A trustworthiness perspective. Asia Pacific J. Management 40(2):681–706.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lukkarinen A, Teich JE, Wallenius H, Wallenius J (2016) Success drivers of online equity crowdfunding campaigns. Decision Support Systems 87:26–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDaniel MA, Rothstein HR, Whetzel DL (2006) Publication bias: A case study of four test vendors. Personnel Psych. 59(4):927–953.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meoli A, Munari F, Bort J (2019) The patent paradox in crowdfunding: An empirical analysis of Kickstarter data. Indust. Corporate Change 28(5):1321–1341.Google Scholar
• Miglo A (2022) Comparing crowdfunding theory and practice: The case of technology industry in England. Working paper, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.Google Scholar
• Milstein N, Striet Y, Lavidor M, Anaki D, Gordon I (2022) Rivalry and performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Organ. Psych. Rev. 12(3):332–361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mollick E (2014) The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. J. Bus. Venturing 29(1):1–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moradi M, Badrinarayanan V (2021) The effects of brand prominence and narrative features on crowdfunding success for entrepreneurial aftermarket enterprises. J. Bus. Res. 124(January):286–298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nitani M, Riding A, He B (2019) On equity crowdfunding: Investor rationality and success factors. Venture Capital 21(2–3):243–272.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oo PP, Allison TH, Sahaym A, Juasrikul S (2019) User entrepreneurs’ multiple identities and crowdfunding performance: Effects through product innovativeness, perceived passion, and need similarity. J. Bus. Venturing 34(5):105895.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parhankangas A, Renko M (2017) Linguistic style and crowdfunding success among social and commercial entrepreneurs. J. Bus. Venturing 32(2):215–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paz FL (2021) Ending poverty is urgent: Determining the factors that affect prosocial crowdfunding success. Unpublished master’s thesis, ISCTE–University Institute of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
• Petty RE (2013) Two routes to persuasion: State of the art. d’Ydewalle G, Bertelson P, Eelen P, eds. International Perspectives on Psychological Science, II: The State of the Art (Psychology Press, London), 229–247.Google Scholar
• Petty RE, Cacioppo JT (1986) The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Berkowitz L, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Academic Press, New York), 123–205.Google Scholar
• Pinkow F, Emmerich P (2021) Re-examining crowdfunding success: How the crowdfunding goal moderates the relationship of success factors and crowdfunding performance. Central Eur. Bus. Rev. 10(3):91–114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pötzsch S, Böhme R (2010) The role of soft information in trust building: Evidence from online social lending. Acquisti A, Smith SW, Sadeghi AR, eds. Trust and Trustworthy Computing (Springer, Berlin), 381–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Qahri-Saremi H, Montazemi AR (2019) Factors affecting the adoption of an electronic word of mouth message: A meta-analysis. J. Management Inform. Systems 36(3):969–1001.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ralcheva A, Roosenboom P (2016) On the road to success in equity crowdfunding. Working paper, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.Google Scholar
• Ralcheva A, Roosenboom P (2020) Forecasting success in equity crowdfunding. Small Bus. Econom. 55(1):39–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Razan KF, Widyastuti A (2022) Exploring success factors in Indonesian equity crowdfunding. J. Digital Innovation Stud. 1(1):21–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rijanto A (2022) Creative industries project financing through crowdfunding: The roles of fund target & backers. Creative Industries J. 15(1):79–96.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robertson EN, Wooster RB (2015) Crowdfunding as a social movement: The determinants of success in Kickstarter campaigns. Working paper, Department of Economics, Portland State University, Portland.Google Scholar
• Rossi A, Vanacker T, Vismara S (2020) Equity crowdfunding: New evidence from US and UK markets. Working paper, Department of Management, University of Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy.Google Scholar
• Roth PL, Le H, Oh IS, Van Iddekinge CH, Bobko P (2018) Using beta coefficients to impute missing correlations in meta-analysis research: Reasons for caution. J. Appl. Psych. 103(6):644–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothstein HR, Sutton AJ, Borenstein M (2005) Publication bias in meta-analysis. Rothstein HR, Sutton AJ, Borenstein M, eds. Publication Bias in Meta Analysis: Prevention, Assessment, and Adjustments (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK), 1–7.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sabherwal R, Jeyaraj A, Chowa C (2006) Information system success: Individual and organizational determinants. Management Sci. 52(12):1849–1864.Link, Google Scholar
• Scheaf DJ, Davis BC, Webb JW, Coombs JE, Borns J, Holloway G (2018) Signals’ flexibility and interaction with visual cues: Insights from crowdfunding. J. Bus. Venturing 33(6):720–741.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmidt FL (1996) Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers. Psych. Methods 1(2):115–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmidt FL, Hunter JE (2015) Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings, 3rd ed. (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schryen G (2015) Writing qualitative IS literature reviews—Guidelines for synthesis, interpretation, and guidance of research. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 37:286–325.Google Scholar
• Shahab Y, Ye Z, Riaz Y, Ntim CG (2019) Individual’s financial investment decision-making in reward-based crowdfunding: Evidence from China. Appl. Econom. Lett. 26(4):261–266.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shneor R, Vik AA (2020) Crowdfunding success: A systematic literature review 2010–2017. Baltic J. Management 15(2):149–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siebeneicher SP, Bock C (2022) Sustainable aim or personal gain? How signals of personal and shared sustainable value relate to crowdfunding success. Working paper, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies, Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
• Skirnevskiy V, Bendig D, Brettel M (2017) The influence of internal social capital on serial creators’ success in crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice 41(2):209–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sokolova K, Perez C (2018) The digital ingredients of donation-based crowdfunding. A data-driven study of Leetchi projects and social campaigns. J. Decision Systems 27(3):146–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steigenberger N (2017) Why supporters contribute to reward-based crowdfunding. Internat. J. Entrepreneurial Behav. Res. 23(2):336–353.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tafesse W (2021) Communicating crowdfunding campaigns: How message strategy, vivid media use and product type influence campaign success. J. Bus. Res. 127:252–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Templier M, Paré G (2015) A framework for guiding and evaluating literature reviews. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 37:112–137.Google Scholar
• Thies F, Wessel M, Benlian A (2018) Network effects on crowdfunding platforms: Exploring the implications of relaxing input control. Inform. Systems J. 28(6):1239–1262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tian J (2021) Do you want to foresee your future? The best model predicting the success of Kickstarter campaigns. Proc. 13th Internat. Conf. Machine Learn. Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 223–231.Google Scholar
• Tosatto J, Cox J, Nguyen T (2022) With a little help from my friends: The role of online creator-fan communication channels in the success of creative crowdfunding campaigns. Comput. Human Behav. 127:107005.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Twenge JM (2000) The age of anxiety? Birth cohort change in anxiety and neuroticism, 1952–1993. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 79(6):1007–1021.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Twenge JM, Campbell WK (2001) Age and birth cohort differences in self-esteem: A cross-temporal meta-analysis. Personality Soc. Psych. Rev. 5(4):321–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Twenge JM, Konrath S, Foster JD, Campbell WK, Bushman BJ (2008) Egos inflating over time: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of the narcissistic personality inventory. J. Personality 76(4):875–901.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Usman SM, Bukhari FAS, Usman M, Badulescu D, Sial MS (2019) Does the role of media and founder’s past success mitigate the problem of information asymmetry? Evidence from a UK crowdfunding platform. Sustainability 11(3):692.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Valentine JC, Piggott TD, Rothstein HR (2010) How many studies do you need? A primer on statistical power for meta-analysis. J. Ed. Behav. Statist. 35(2):215–247.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vigneron L (2020) Distance in reward based crowdfunding. Working paper, Laboratoire de Recherche Sociétés & Humanités, Université Polytechnique Hauts-de-France, Valenciennes, France.Google Scholar
• Vismara S (2019) Sustainability in equity crowdfunding. Tech. Forecasting Soc. Change 141:98–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vom Brocke J, Simons A, Riemer K, Niehaves B, Plattfaut R, Cleven A (2015) Standing on the shoulders of giants: Challenges and recommendations of literature search in information systems research. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 37:205–224.Google Scholar
• Wang W, Chen W, Zhu K, Wang H (2020) Emphasizing the entrepreneur or the idea? The impact of text content emphasis on investment decisions in crowdfunding. Decision Support Systems 136:113341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang N, Liang H, Xue Y, Ge S (2021) Mitigating information asymmetry to achieve crowdfunding success: Signaling and online communication. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 22(3):773–796.Google Scholar
• Wang N, Li Q, Liang H, Ye T, Ge S (2018) Understanding the importance of interaction between creators and backers in crowdfunding success. Electronic Commerce Res. Appl. 27:106–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wessel M, Thies F, Benlian A (2022) The role of prototype fidelity in technology crowdfunding. J. Bus. Venturing 37(4):106220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wood JA (2008) Methodology for dealing with duplicate study effects in a meta-analysis. Organ. Res. Methods 11(1):79–95.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wu J, Lederer A (2009) A meta-analysis of the role of environment-based voluntariness in information technology acceptance. MIS Quart. 33(2):419–432.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xiao S, Yue Q (2018) Investors’ inertia behavior and their repeated decision-making in online reward-based crowdfunding market. Decision Support Systems 111:101–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xu LZ (2018) Will a digital camera cure your sick puppy? Modality and category effects in donation-based crowdfunding. Telematics Informatics 35(7):1914–1924.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang Y, Koh Y (2022) Is restaurant crowdfunding immune to the COVID-19 pandemic? Internat. J. Contemporary Hospitality Management 34(4):1353–1373.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang N, Xu H (2021) Reconciling the paradoxical findings of choice overload through an analytical lens. MIS Quart. 45(4):1893–1920.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhao L, Sun Z (2020) Pure donation or hybrid donation crowdfunding: Which model is more conducive to prosocial campaign success? Baltic J. Management 15(2):237–260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhao Y, Xie X, Yang L (2021) Female entrepreneurs and equity crowdfunding: The consequential roles of lead investors and venture stages. Internat. Entrepreneurship Management J. 17(3):1183–1211.Crossref, Google Scholar