The DOI matches its Crossref record; 101 of the 101 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Activist Choice Homophily and the Crowdfunding of Female Founders
Open accessAbstract
In this paper, we examine when members of underrepresented groups choose to support each other, using the context of the funding of female founders via donation-based crowdfunding. Building on theories of choice homophily, we develop the concept of activist choice homophily, in which the basis of attraction between two individuals is not merely similarity between them, but rather perceptions of shared structural barriers stemming from a common social identity based on group membership. We differentiate activist choice homophily from homophily based on the similarity between individuals (“interpersonal choice homophily”), as well as from “induced homophily,” which reflects the likelihood that those in a particular social category will affiliate and form networks. Using lab experiments and field data, we show that activist choice homophily provides an explanation for why women are more likely to succeed at crowdfunding than men and why women are most successful in industries in which they are least represented.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241
Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415 · Cited by 18,567
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
(2017) · Macat Library eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781912282432 · Cited by 18,122
(2010) · Social Science Quarterly · doi:10.1111/(issn)1540-6237 · Cited by 13,458
An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (2000) · Organizational Identity · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199269464.003.0005 · Cited by 12,487
Social Identity Theory and the Organization
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. (1989) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1989.4278999 · Cited by 7,671
Men and Women of the Corporation.
Strauss, G., & Kanter, R. M. (1978) · Industrial and Labor Relations Review · doi:10.2307/2522922 · Cited by 7,288
Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory.
Willer, D., Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1989) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2073157 · Cited by 7,159
The Complexity of Intersectionality
McCall, L. (2005) · Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society · doi:10.1086/426800 · Cited by 6,682
Cited by
Does equity crowdfunding democratize entrepreneurial finance?
Cumming, D., Meoli, M., & Vismara, S. (2021) · Small Business Economics · doi:10.1007/s11187-019-00188-z · Cited by 268
Metadata
- Authors
- Greenberg, J., & Mollick, E.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-11-05
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 341-374
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3815
- OpenAlex
- W3125596025
- Cited by
- 528
- References
- 101
- FWCI
- 69.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Activist Choice Homophily and the Crowdfunding of Female Founders. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0001839216678847
- The paper
- Greenberg, J., & Mollick, E. (2017). Activist Choice Homophily and the Crowdfunding of Female Founders. Administrative Science Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216678847
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.