An Examination of the Dynamics of Crowdsourcing Contests: Role of Feedback Type

References

• Alexy O, George G, Salter AJ (2013) Cui bono? The selective revealing of knowledge and its implications for innovative activity. Acad. Management Rev. 38(2):270–291.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amabile TM (1983) The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 45(2):357–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amabile TM (1998) How to Kill Creativity (Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston).Google Scholar
• Anderson N, Potočnik K, Zhou J (2014) Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. J. Management 40(5):1297–1333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Annett J (1969) Feedback and Human Behaviour: The Effects of Knowledge of Results, Incentives and Reinforcement on Learning and Performance (Penguin Books, London).Google Scholar
• Archak N, Sundararajan A (2009) Optimal design of crowdsourcing contests. Proc. 30th Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems.Google Scholar
• Ashford SJ, Tsui AS (1991) Self-regulation for managerial effectiveness: The role of active feedback seeking. Acad. Management J. 34(2):251–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balzer WK, Doherty ME (1989) Effects of cognitive feedback on performance. Psych. Bull. 106(3):410–433.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bayus BL (2013) Crowdsourcing new product ideas over time: An analysis of the Dell Ideastorm community. Management Sci. 59(1):226–244.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 36:187–200.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
• Brehmer B (1980) In one word: Not from experience. Acta Psych. (Amsterdam) 45(1–3):223–241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brehmer B (1990) Strategies in real-time, dynamic decision making. Hogarth R, ed. Insights in Decision Making: A Tribute to Hillel J. Einhorn (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Brophy DR (1998) Understanding, measuring, and enhancing individual creative problem-solving efforts. Creativity Res. J. 11(2):123–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Butler AC, Karpicke JD, Roediger HL III (2007) The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests. J. Experiment. Psych. Appl. 13(4):273–281.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camacho N, Nam H, Kannan PK, Stremersch S (2019) Tournaments to crowdsource innovation: The role of moderator feedback and participation intensity. J. Marketing 83(2):138–157.Crossref, 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
• Chawla NV, Bowyer KW, Hall LO, Kegelmeyer WP (2002) SMOTE: Synthetic minority over-sampling technique. J. Artificial Intelligence Res. 16:321–357.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cropley A (2006) In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Res. J. 18(3):391–404.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diehl M, Stroebe W (1991) Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 61(3):392–403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doherty ME, Balzer WK (1988) Cognitive feedback. Brehmer B, Joyce CRB, eds. Advances in Psychology (North-Holland, Amsterdam), 163–197.Google Scholar
• Ducarroz C, Yang S, Greenleaf EA (2016) Understanding the impact of in-process promotional messages: An application to online auctions. J. Marketing 80(2):80–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Earley PC, Northcraft GB, Lee C, Lituchy TR (1990) Impact of process and outcome feedback on the relation of goal setting to task performance. Acad. Management J. 33(1):87–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenberger R, Cameron J (1998) Reward, intrinsic interest, and creativity: New findings. Amer. Psych. 53(6):676–679.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faludi A (1973) Planning Theory (Pergamon, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Ghose A, Han SP (2014) Estimating demand for mobile applications in the new economy. Management Sci. 60(6):1470–1488.Link, Google Scholar
• Gibbs JL, Ellison NB, Lai CH (2011) First comes love, then comes Google: An investigation of uncertainty reduction strategies and self-disclosure in online dating. Comm. Res. 38(1):70–100.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
• Goldschmidt G (2016) Linkographic evidence for concurrent divergent and convergent thinking in creative design. Creativity Res. J. 28(2):115–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goodman JS, Wood RE, Hendrickx M (2004) Feedback specificity, exploration, and learning. J. Appl. Psych. 89(2):248–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hammond KR, Summers DA, Deane DH (1973) Negative effects of outcome-feedback in multiple-cue probability learning. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 9(1):30–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hammond KR, Stewart TR, Brehmer B, Steinmann DO (1975) Social-judgment theory. Kaplan MF, S Schwartz S, eds. Human Judgment and Decision Processes (Academic Press, New York), 271–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hattie J, Timperley H (2007) The power of feedback. Rev. Ed. Res. 77(1):81–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hennessey BA, Amabile TM (1988) The conditions of creativity. Sternberg RJ, eds. The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 11–38.Google Scholar
• Hogarth RM, Gibbs BJ, McKenzie CR, Marquis MA (1991) Learning from feedback: Exactingness and incentives. J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 17(4):734–752.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hommel B, Colzato LS, Fischer R, Christoffels I (2011) Bilingualism and creativity: Benefits in convergent thinking come with losses in divergent thinking. Frontiers Psych. 2:273.Google Scholar
• Huang Y, Vir Singh P, Srinivasan K (2014) Crowdsourcing new product ideas under consumer learning. Management Sci. 60(9):2138–2159.Link, Google Scholar
• Hwang EH, Singh PV, Argote L (2019) Jack of all, master of some: Information network and innovation in crowdsourcing communities. Inform. Systems Res. 30(2):389–410.Link, Google Scholar
• Ilgen DR, Fisher CD, Taylor MS (1979) Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. J. Appl. Psych. 64(4):349–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jacoby J, Mazursky D, Troutman T, Kuss A (1984) When feedback is ignored: Disutility of outcome feedback. J. Appl. Psych. 69(3):531–545.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jian L, Ba S, Lu L, Jiang LC, Yang S (2019) Managing the crowds: The effect of prize guarantees and in-process feedback on participation in crowdsourcing contests. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 43(1):97–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang J, Wang Y (2020) A theoretical and empirical investigation of feedback in ideation contests. Production Oper. Management 29(2):481–500.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang Z, Huang Y, Beil DR (2021) The role of feedback in dynamic crowdsourcing contests: A structural empirical analysis. Management Sci. 68(7):4858–4877.Link, Google Scholar
• Jin Y, Lee HCB, Ba S, Stallaert J (2021) Winning by learning? Effect of knowledge sharing in crowdsourcing contests. Inform. Systems Res. 32(3):836–859.Link, Google Scholar
• Koh TK, Cheung MY (2021) Seeker exemplars and quantitative ideation outcomes in crowdsourcing contests. Inform. Systems Res. 33(1):265–284.Link, Google Scholar
• Kluger AN, DeNisi A (1996) The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psych. Bull. 119(2):254–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kopelman RE (1986) Managing Productivity in Organizations: A Practical, People-Oriented Perspective (McGraw-Hill College, New York).Google Scholar
• Kozbelt A, Beghetto RA, Runco MA (2010) Theories of creativity. Kaufman JC, Sternberg RJ, eds. The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 20–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kulhavy RW, Anderson RC (1972) Delay-retention effect with multiple-choice tests. J. Ed. Psych. 63(5):505–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kulik JA, Kulik CLC (1988) Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Rev. Ed. Res. 58(1):79–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR, Jeppesen LB, Lohse PA, Panetta JA (2007) The Value of Openness in Scientific Problem Solving (Division of Research, Harvard Business School, Boston), 7–50.Google Scholar
• Larrimore L, Jiang L, Larrimore J, Markowitz D, Gorski S (2011) Peer to peer lending: The relationship between language features, trustworthiness, and persuasion success. J. Appl. Comm. Res. 39(1):19–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liden RC, Mitchell TR (1985) Reactions to feedback: The role of attributions. Acad. Management J. 28(2):291–308.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
• Lowe DG (1999) Object recognition from local scale-invariant features. Proc. Seventh IEEE Internat. Conf. Comput. Vision, 1150–1157Google Scholar
• Lowry PB, Zhang J, Wang C, Siponen M (2016) Why do adults engage in cyberbullying on social media? An integration of online disinhibition and deindividuation effects with the social structure and social learning model. Inform. Systems Res. 27(4):962–986.Link, Google Scholar
• Lüttgens D, Pollok P, Antons D, Piller F (2014) Wisdom of the crowd and capabilities of a few: Internal success factors of crowdsourcing for innovation. J. Bus. Econom. 84(3):339–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malhotra A, Majchrzak A (2019) Greater associative knowledge variety in crowdsourcing platforms leads to generation of novel solutions by crowds. J. Knowledge Management 23(8):1628–1651.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mayya R, Ye S, Viswanathan S, Agarwal R (2021) When forgoes screening in online markets and why? Evidence from Airbnb. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 45(4):1745–1776.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Michael WB, Wright CR (1989) Psychometric issues in the assessment of creativity. Glover, JA, Ronning RR, Reynolds CR, eds. Handbook of Creativity (Springer, Boston), 33–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mihm J, Schlapp J (2019) Sourcing innovation: On feedback in contests. Management Sci. 65(2):559–576.Link, Google Scholar
• Mory EH (2013) Feedback research revisited. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (Routledge, Abingdon, UK), 738–776.Google Scholar
• Mullen B, Johnson C, Salas E (1991) Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic Appl. Soc. Psych. 12(1):3–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Leary MB, Wilson JM, Metiu A (2014) Beyond being there. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 38(4):1219–1244.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Opitz B, Ferdinand NK, Mecklinger A (2011) Timing matters: The impact of immediate and delayed feedback on artificial language learning. Frontiers Human Neuroscience 5:8.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pound LD, Bailey GD (1975) Immediate feedback less effective than delayed feedback for contextual learning? Reading Improvement 12(4):222.Google Scholar
• Runco MA, ed. (1994) Problem Finding, Problem Solving, and Creativity (Greenwood Publishing Group, Westport, CT).Google Scholar
• Sadler DR (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Sci. 18(2):119–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sengupta K, Abdel-Hamid TK (1993) Alternative conceptions of feedback in dynamic decision environments: An experimental investigation. Management Sci. 39(4):411–428.Link, Google Scholar
• Sheremata WA (2000) Centrifugal and centripetal forces in radical new product development under time pressure. Acad. Management Rev. 25(2):389–408.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steelman ZR, Hammer BI, Limayem M (2014) Data collection in the digital age. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 38(2):355–378.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sterman JD (1989) Modeling managerial behavior: Misperceptions of feedback in a dynamic decision making experiment. Management Sci. 35(3):321–339.Link, Google Scholar
• Terwiesch C, Ulrich KT (2009) Innovation Tournaments: Creating and Selecting Exceptional Opportunities (Harvard Business Press, Brighton, MA).Google Scholar
• Terwiesch C, Xu Y (2008) Innovation contests, open innovation, and multi-agent problem solving. Management Sci. 54(9):1529–1543.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang MM, Wang JJ, Zhang WN (2019) How to enhance solvers’ continuance intention in crowdsourcing contest: The role of interactivity and fairness perception. Online Inform. Rev. 44(1):238–257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang Q, Li B, Singh PV (2018) Copycats vs. original mobile apps: A machine learning copycat-detection method and empirical analysis. Inform. Systems Res. 29(2):273–291.Link, Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM (2002) Econometric Analysis of Cross-Section and Panel Data (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).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
• Zheng H, Xie Z, Hou W, Li D (2014) Antecedents of solution quality in crowdsourcing: The sponsor’s perspective. J. Electronic Commerce Res. 15(3):212–224.Google Scholar