Good to Go First? Position Effects in Expert Evaluation of Early-Stage Ventures

References

• 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
• Boudreau KJ, Guinan EC, Lakhani KR, Riedl C (2016) Looking across and looking beyond the knowledge frontier: Intellectual distance, novelty, and resource allocation in science. Management Sci. 62(10):2765–2783.Link, Google Scholar
• Brooks AW, Huang L, Kearney SW, Murray FE (2014) Investors prefer entrepreneurial ventures pitched by attractive men. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111(12):4427–4431.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bruine de Bruin W (2005) Save the last dance for me: Unwanted serial position effects in jury evaluations. Acta Psych. 118:245–260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bruine de Bruin W (2006) Save the last dance II: Unwanted serial position effects in figure skating judgments. Acta Psych. 123:299–311.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carney DR, Banaji MR (2012) First best. PLoS One 7(6):e35088.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choudhury P (2017) Innovation outcomes in a distributed organization: Intrafirm mobility and access to resources. Organ. Sci. 28:339–354.Link, Google Scholar
• Clingingsmith D, Shane S (2017) Let others go first: How proposal order affects investor interest in elevator proposals. Preprint, submitted December 13, https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/6rbyx/.Google Scholar
• Criscuolo P, Dahlander L, Grohsjean T, Salter A (2021) The sequence effect in panel decisions: Evidence from the evaluation of research and development projects. Organ. Sci. 32(4):909–1148.Link, Google Scholar
• Danziger S, Levav J, Avnaim-Pesso L (2011) Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108(17):6889–6892.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dean ML (1980) Presentation order effects in product taste tests. J. Psyc. 105(1):107–110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eckhardt J, Shane S, Delmar F (2006) Multi-stage selection and the financing of new ventures. Management Sci. 52(2):220–232.Link, Google Scholar
• Feenberg D, Ganguli I, Gaule P, Gruber J (2017) It’s good to be first: Order bias in reading and citing NBER working papers. Rev. Econom. Stat. 99(1):32–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glejser H, Heyndels B (2001) Efficiency and inefficiency in the ranking in competitions: The Case of the Queen Elisabeth Music Contest. J. Cultural Econom. 25(2):109–129.Google Scholar
• Greenberg J (2021) Social network Positions, peer effects, and evaluation updating: An experimental test in the entrepreneurial context. Organ. Sci., ePub ahead of print February 22, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2020.1416.Google Scholar
• Greenberg J, Mollick EM (2017) Activist choice homophily and the crowdfunding of female founders. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(2):341–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenberg J, Liu C, ten Brinke L (2021) Why don’t haters act? Peer evaluation, negative relationships, and closure. Working paper, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
• Haveman HA, Jia N, Shi J, Wang YX (2016) The dynamics of political embeddedness in China. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(1):67–104.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ho DE, Imai K (2008) Estimating causal effects of ballot order from a randomized natural experiment: The California alphabet lottery, 1978–2002. Public Opin. Quart. 72(2):216–240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang L, Pearce JL (2015) The effectiveness of early-stage investor gut feel in entrepreneurial investment decisions. Admin. Sci. Quart. 60(4):634–670.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kacperczyk A, Marx M (2016) Revisiting the small-firm effect on entrepreneurship: Evidence from firm dissolutions. Organ. Sci. 27(4):893–910.Link, Google Scholar
• Lanahan L, Armanios D (2018) Does more certification always benefit a venture? Organ. Sci. 29(5):931–947.Link, Google Scholar
• Lerner J (1999) The government as venture capitalist: The long-run effects of the SBIR program. J. Bus. 72(3):285–318.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levav J, Heitmann M, Herrmann A, Iyengar SS (2010) Order in product customization decisions: Evidence from field experiments. J. Polit. Econom. 118(2):274–299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li D, Agha L (2015) Big names or big ideas: Do peer-review panels select the best science proposals? Science 348(6233):434–438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li YE, Epley N (2009) When the best appears to be saved for last: Serial position effects on choice. J. Behav. Decision Making 22(4):378–389.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luo H (2014) When to sell your idea: Theory and evidence from the movie industry. Management Sci. 60(12):3067–3086.Link, Google Scholar
• Miller JM, Krosnick JA (1998) The impact of candidate name order on election outcomes. Public Opin. Quart. 62(3):291–330.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mollick E, Nanda R (2015) Wisdom or madness? Comparing crowds with expert evaluation in funding the arts. Management Sci. 62(6):1533–1553.Link, Google Scholar
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2016) SBIR/STTR at the Department of Energy. Consensus Study Report, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Page L, Page K (2010) Last shall be first: A field study of biases in sequential performance evaluation on the Idol series. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 73(2):186–198.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pasek J, Schneider D, Krosnick JA, Tahk A, Ophir E, Milligan C (2014) Prevalence and moderators of the candidate name-order effect: Evidence from statewide general elections in California. Public Opin. Quart. 78(2):416–439.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Piezunka H, Dahlander L (2014) Distant search, narrow attention: How crowding alters organizations’ filtering of suggestions in crowdsourcing. Acad. Management J. 58(3):856–880.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Qin X (2006) Three barriers for the further growth of state funding programs for high-technology ventures. New Econom. Weekly 12:26–30.Google Scholar
• Sahlman WA (1990) The structure and governance of venture capital organizations. J. Financial Econom. 27(2):473–521.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shi D, Huang K, Wang Y (2020) China’s entrepreneurial landscape. NUS Working Paper, National University of Singapore, Singapore.Google Scholar
• Sorenson J (2007) Bureaucracy and entrepreneurship: Workplace effects on entrepreneurial entry. Admin. Sci. Quart. 52(3):387–412.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart T, Ding W (2006) When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences. Amer. J. Sociol. 112(1):97–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taussig M, Delios A (2015) Unbundling the effects of institutions on firm resources: The contingent value of being local in emerging economy private equity. Strategic Management J. 36(12):1845–1865.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Unkelbach C, Memmert D (2014) Serial-position effects in evaluative judgments. Current Directions Psych. Sci. 23(3):195–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang Y (2016) Bringing the stages back in: Social network ties and start-up firms’ access to venture capital in China. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 10(3):300–317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang D, Luo XR (2019) Retire in peace: Officials’ political incentives and corporate diversification in China. Admin. Sci. Quart. 64(4):773–809.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Li J, Furman JL (2017) Firm performance and state innovation funding: Evidence from China’s Innofund program. Res. Policy 46(6):1142–1161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilson V (1977) Objectivity and effect of order of appearance in judging of synchronized swimming meets. Perceptual Motor Skills 44(1):295–298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wu A (2016) Organizational decision-making and information: Angel investments by venture capital partners. Acad. Management Best Paper Proc.189–194.Google Scholar
• Younkin P, Kuppuswamy V (2017) The colorblind crowd? Founder race and performance in crowdfunding. Management Sci. 64(7):3269–3287.Link, Google Scholar