Reward or punish: investigating output controls and content generation in the multi-sided platform context
Abstract
Purpose: E-commerce content platforms are a typical type of multi-sided platform that combines transactions with social media platforms. To solve the managerial dilemma of balancing the tension between control and autonomy of influencers' output performance, this study aims to investigate how exercising output controls through performance rewards and performance punishments impact the quantity and quality of influencers' content generation. Design/methodology/approach: Choosing JD WeChat Shopping Circle as the research context and leveraging the introduction of a double commission subsidy policy and a removal policy as quasi-natural experiments, this study applied the difference-in-differences (DID) method to empirically test hypotheses. Findings: Performance rewards incentivize influencers to generate high-quality content, but such incentivizing effects attenuate over time. Performance punishment drives influencers to generate expected pieces of high-quality content, and such safeguarding effects accentuate over time. Originality/value: This study proposes output controls as an important form of governance mechanism in multi-sided platforms and substantiates how rewards and punishments as two facets of incentives affect complementors' behaviors. In addition, by distinguishing performance-contingent rewards from completion-contingent rewards, this study helps resolve the mixed findings on the effects of monetary rewards in the user-generated content (UGC) literature.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Findings on being advertiser friendly relate to performance rewards and performance punishments on multisided platforms.
“In addition, our findings on being advertiser friendly relate to the performance rewards and performance punishments on multisided platforms (Lin et al. 2022).”
From Content Creators Between Platform Control and User Autonomy: The Role of Algorithms and Revenue Sharing (2023) · cites this paper as Lin et al. 2022
Incentivisation still certainly promotes or punishes content.
“However, incentivisation still certainly promotes or punishes content (Caplan and Gillespie 2020; Lin et al. 2022).”
From Content Creators Between Platform Control and User Autonomy: The Role of Algorithms and Revenue Sharing (2023) · cites this paper as Lin et al. 2022
Punishments continue to be effective and content creators deliberately try to be classified as advertiser friendly.
“We also reinforce Lin et al.’s (2022) study that punishments continue to be effective and content creators deliberately try to be classified as advertiser friendly (Caplan and Gillespie 2020, p. 4).”
From Content Creators Between Platform Control and User Autonomy: The Role of Algorithms and Revenue Sharing (2023) · cites this paper as Lin et al. (2022)
Cites
Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B., & Bush, A. A. (2010) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1100.0323 · Cited by 1,514 · see citing works
Ghazawneh, A., & Henfridsson, O. (2013) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2012.00406.x · Cited by 854 · see citing works
Platform governance matters: How platform gatekeeping affects knowledge sharing among complementors
Zhang, Y., Li, J., & Tong, T. W. (2022) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3191 · Cited by 214 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hödl, T., & Myrach, T. (2023) · Business & Information Systems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s12599-023-00808-9 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lin, F., Tian, H., Zhao, J., & Chi, M.
- Affiliations
- China University of Geosciences (CN)
- Umeå University (SE)
- Venue
- Internet Research
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2022-05-13
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 578-605
- ISSN
- 1066-2243 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4280573001
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 2.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Internet Research (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Economy and Work Transformation
- Keywords
- multi-sided platforms, influencer marketing, output control, performance rewards, user-generated content, content quality, platform governance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review