Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 326

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 104 of the 104 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Extending Signaling Theory to Rhetorical Signals: Evidence from Crowdfunding

Steigenberger, Norbert, Wilhelm, Hendrik·2018·Organization Science

Abstract

Firms often need to acquire external financial resources to maintain and develop their business. To attract these resources, firms employ various substantive and rhetorical signals, such as publishing press releases, showcasing prototypes of new products, and hiring renowned managers. However, despite the relevance of signals, we still know little about how they interact—whether they strengthen, weaken, or neutralize one another—in attracting resources. Traditional signaling theory downplays the importance of rhetoric while management research acknowledges its relevance, creating a disconnect between these two camps and a shortcoming that deserves further investigation. To address this shortcoming, we advance the concept of signal portfolios. Signal portfolios may combine rhetorical signals with substantive signals. We employ this concept to explain how the interaction of the two affects financial resource acquisition in high-noise environments—settings where firms send multiple signals simultaneously. Based on longitudinal data on crowdfunding, an exemplary high-noise environment, we find that rhetorical signals complement substantive signals in certain situations and, thus, strengthen their impact on a firm’s financial resource acquisition. Contrary to our expectations, however, we find that under specific conditions, rhetorical signals may also weaken the impact of substantive signals. Our research has implications for signaling theory, crowdfunding research, and management practice. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1195 .

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/orsc.2017.1195

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 104 references

Cited by

See all 326

Metadata

Authors
Steigenberger, N., & Wilhelm, H.
Venue
Organization Science
Published
2018-06
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
529-546
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
OpenAlex
W2804155281
Cited by
326
References
104
FWCI
23.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Extending Signaling Theory to Rhetorical Signals: Evidence from Crowdfunding. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.2017.1195
The paper
Steigenberger, N., & Wilhelm, H. (2018). Extending Signaling Theory to Rhetorical Signals: Evidence from Crowdfunding. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1195

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.