The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Hidden Cost of Accommodating Crowdfunder Privacy Preferences: A Randomized Field Experiment
Open accessAbstract
Online crowdfunding has received a great deal of attention as a promising avenue to fostering entrepreneurship and innovation. Because online settings bring increased visibility and traceability of transactions, many crowdfunding platforms provide mechanisms that enable a campaign contributor to conceal his or her identity or contribution amount from peers. We study the impact of these information (privacy) control mechanisms on crowdfunder behavior. Employing a randomized experiment at one of the world’s largest online crowdfunding platforms, we find evidence of both positive (e.g., comfort) and negative (e.g., privacy priming) causal effects. We find that reducing access to information controls induces a net increase in fund-raising, yet this outcome results from two competing influences—treatment increases willingness to engage with the platform (a 4.9% increase in the probability of contribution) and simultaneously decreases the average contribution (a $5.81 decline). This decline derives from a publicity effect, wherein contributors respond to a lack of privacy by tempering extreme contributions. We unravel the causal mechanisms that drive the results and discuss the implications of our findings for the design of online platforms. This paper was accepted by Lee Fleming, entrepreneurship and innovation.
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
Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error
Heckman, J. J. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912352 · Cited by 28,779
Social Image and the 50-50 Norm: A Theoretical and Experimental Analysis of Audience Effects
(2009) · Econometrica · doi:10.3982/ecta7384 · Cited by 1,081
Social Networks, Personalized Advertising, and Privacy Controls
Tucker, C. E. (2014) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmr.10.0355 · Cited by 829
The Value of Privacy Assurance: An Exploratory Field Experiment1
Hui, K.-L., Teo, H. H., & Lee, S.-Y. T. (2007) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148779 · Cited by 614
Strangers on a Plane: Context-Dependent Willingness to Divulge Sensitive Information
John, L. K., Acquisti, A., & Loewenstein, G. (2011) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/656423 · Cited by 414
Faulk, C., & Dolinoy, D. C. (2011) · Epigenetics · doi:10.4161/epi.6.7.16209 · Cited by 386
Cited by
Can You Gig It? An Empirical Examination of the Gig Economy and Entrepreneurial Activity
Burtch, G., Carnahan, S., & Greenwood, B. N. (2018) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2017.2916 · Cited by 785
Self-citationThe emergence of the global fintech market: economic and technological determinants
Haddad, C., & Hornuf, L. (2019) · Small Business Economics · doi:10.1007/s11187-018-9991-x · Cited by 754
Chen, L., Tong, T. W., Tang, S., & Han, N. (2022) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/01492063211045023 · Cited by 345
Consumer privacy and the future of data-based innovation and marketing
Bleier, A., Goldfarb, A., & Tucker, C. (2020) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.03.006 · Cited by 239
OM Forum—Innovative Online Platforms: Research Opportunities
Chen, Y.-J., Dai, T., Korpeoglu, C. G., Körpeoğlu, E., Sahin, O., Tang, C. S., & Xiao, S. (2020) · Manufacturing & Service Operations Management · doi:10.1287/msom.2018.0757 · Cited by 226
Metadata
- Authors
- Burtch, G., Ghose, A., & Wattal, S.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2015-05
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 949-962
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2024971718
- Cited by
- 298
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 75.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: The Hidden Cost of Accommodating Crowdfunder Privacy Preferences: A Randomized Field Experiment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2069
- The paper
- Burtch, G., Ghose, A., & Wattal, S. (2015). The Hidden Cost of Accommodating Crowdfunder Privacy Preferences: A Randomized Field Experiment. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2069
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.