Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.5555/3237383.3237477acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaamasConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Information Design in Crowdfunding under Thresholding Policies

Published: 09 July 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Crowdfunding has emerged as a prominent way for entrepreneurs to secure funding without sophisticated intermediation. In crowdfunding, an entrepreneur often has to decide how to disclose the campaign status in order to collect as many contributions as possible. Such decisions are difficult to make primarily due to incomplete information. We propose information design as a tool to help the entrepreneur to improve revenue by influencing backers' beliefs. We introduce a heuristic algorithm to dynamically compute information-disclosure policies for the entrepreneur, followed by an empirical evaluation to demonstrate its competitiveness over the widely-adopted immediate-disclosure policy. Our results demonstrate that the immediate-disclosure policy is not optimal when backers follow thresholding policies despite its ease of implementation. With appropriate heuristics, an entrepreneur can benefit from dynamic information disclosure. Our work sheds light on information design in a dynamic setting where agents make decisions using thresholding policies.

References

[1]
Ajay Agrawal, Christian Catalini, and Avi Goldfarb. 2014. Some simple economics of crowdfunding. Innovation Policy and the Economy Vol. 14, 1 (2014), 63--97.
[2]
Ajay K Agrawal, Christian Catalini, and Avi Goldfarb. 2011. The geography of crowdfunding. Technical Report. National bureau of economic research.
[3]
Saeed Alaei, Azarakhsh Malekian, and Mohamed Mostagir. 2016. A Dynamic Model of Crowdfunding. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation. ACM, 363--363.
[4]
Ricardo Alonso and Odilon Camara. 2016. Bayesian persuasion with heterogeneous priors. Journal of Economic Theory Vol. 165 (2016), 672--706.
[5]
W Brian Arthur and David A Lane. 1993. Information contagion. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics Vol. 4, 1 (1993), 81--104.
[6]
Pak Hung Au. 2015. Dynamic information disclosure. The RAND Journal of Economics Vol. 46, 4 (2015), 791--823.
[7]
Albert Bandura. 1989. Human agency in social cognitive theory. American psychologist Vol. 44, 9 (1989), 1175.
[8]
Dirk Bergemann and Stephen Morris. 2016. Bayes correlated equilibrium and the comparison of information structures in games. Theoretical Economics Vol. 11, 2 (2016), 487--522.
[9]
Dirk Bergemann and Martin Pesendorfer. 2007. Information structures in optimal auctions. Journal of Economic Theory Vol. 137, 1 (2007), 580--609.
[10]
Dirk Bergemann and Achim Wambach. 2015. Sequential information disclosure in auctions. Journal of Economic Theory Vol. 159 (2015), 1074--1095.
[11]
David Blackwell et almbox. 1953. Equivalent comparisons of experiments. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics Vol. 24, 2 (1953), 265--272.
[12]
Christopher P Chambers and Federico Echenique. 2016. Revealed preference theory. Vol. Vol. 56. Cambridge University Press.
[13]
Massimo G Colombo, Chiara Franzoni, and Cristina Rossi-Lamastra. 2015. Internal social capital and the attraction of early contributions in crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice Vol. 39, 1 (2015), 75--100.
[14]
Jacob W Crandall. 2014. Towards minimizing disappointment in repeated games. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research Vol. 49 (2014), 111--142.
[15]
David Easley and Arpita Ghosh. 2015. Behavioral mechanism design: Optimal crowdsourcing contracts and prospect theory Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation. ACM, 679--696.
[16]
Matthew Ellman and Sjaak Hurkens. 2015. Optimal crowdfunding design. Available at SSRN 2709617 (2015).
[17]
Charles AR Hoare. 1962. Quicksort. Comput. J. Vol. 5, 1 (1962), 10--16.
[18]
Daniel Kahneman. 2003. A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist Vol. 58, 9 (2003), 697.
[19]
Emir Kamenica and Matthew Gentzkow. 2011. Bayesian persuasion. The American Economic Review Vol. 101, 6 (2011), 2590--2615.
[20]
Paul Kau and Lowell Hill. 1972. A threshold model of purchasing decisions. Journal of Marketing Research (1972), 264--270.
[21]
Kickstarter . 2017. Kickstarter Stats. https://www.kickstarter.com/help/stats. (2017). Online; accessed November 10th, 2017.
[22]
Ludmila I Kuncheva and Christopher J Whitake. 2003. Measures of diversity in classifier ensembles and their relationship with the ensemble accuracy. Machine learning, Vol. 51, 2 (2003), 181--207.
[23]
Venkat Kuppuswamy and Barry L Bayus. 2015. Crowdfunding creative ideas: The dynamics of project backers in Kickstarter. (2015).
[24]
Venkat Kuppuswamy and Barry L Bayus. 2017. Does my contribution to your crowdfunding project matter? Journal of Business Venturing Vol. 32, 1 (2017), 72--89.
[25]
Gwo-Guang Lee and Hsiu-Fen Lin. 2005. Customer perceptions of e-service quality in online shopping. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 33, 2 (2005), 161--176.
[26]
Alessandro Marelli and Andrea Ordanini. 2016. What Makes Crowdfunding Projects Successful Before and During the Campaign? Crowdfunding in europe Springer, 175--192.
[27]
Nathan Marwell. 2015. Competing Fundraising Models in Crowdfunding Markets. Available at SSRN 2777020 (2015).
[28]
Ethan Mollick. 2014. The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing Vol. 29, 1 (2014), 1--16.
[29]
Noam Nisan and Amir Ronen. 1999. Algorithmic mechanism design. In Proceedings of the thirty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing. ACM, 129--140.
[30]
Mesrob I Ohannessian, Mardavij Roozbehani, Donatello Materassi, and Munther A Dahleh. 2014. Dynamic estimation of the price-response of deadline-constrained electric loads under threshold policies. In American Control Conference (ACC), 2014. IEEE, 2798--2803.
[31]
Stephen G Pauker and Jerome P Kassirer. 1980. The threshold approach to clinical decision making. New England Journal of Medicine Vol. 302, 20 (1980), 1109--1117.
[32]
Luis Rayo and Ilya Segal. 2010. Optimal information disclosure. Journal of Political Economy Vol. 118, 5 (2010), 949--987.
[33]
Sheldon M Ross. 1996. Stochastic processes. Vol. Vol. 2. John Wiley & Sons New York.
[34]
Wen Shen, Alanoud Al Khemeiri, Abdulla Almehrzi, Wael Al Enezi, Iyad Rahwan, and Jacob W Crandall. 2017. Regulating Highly Automated Robot Ecologies: Insights from Three User Studies Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Human Agent Interaction. ACM, 111--120.
[35]
Wen Shen, Vahan Babushkin, Zeyar Aung, and Wei Lee Woon. 2013. An ensemble model for day-ahead electricity demand time series forecasting Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Future energy systems. ACM, 51--62.
[36]
Wen Shen, Cristina V. Lopes, and Jacob W. Crandall. 2016. An Online Mechanism for Ridesharing in Autonomous Mobility-on-Demand Systems Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-16). 475--481.
[37]
Jeremy C Short, David J Ketchen, Aaron F McKenny, Thomas H Allison, and R Duane Ireland. 2017. Research on Crowdfunding: Reviewing the (Very Recent) Past and Celebrating the Present. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice Vol. 41, 2 (2017), 149--160.
[38]
Vitaly Skirnevskiy, David Bendig, and Malte Brettel. 2017. The influence of internal social capital on serial creators' success in crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice Vol. 41, 2 (2017), 209--236.
[39]
Jacob Solomon, Wenjuan Ma, and Rick Wash. 2015. Don't wait!: How timing affects coordination of crowdfunding donations Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on CSCW. ACM, 547--556.
[40]
Roland Strausz. 2016. A Theory of Crowdfunding-a mechanism design approach with demand uncertainty and moral hazard. CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP11222 (2016).
[41]
Roland Strausz. 2017. A Theory of Crowdfunding: A Mechanism Design Approach with Demand Uncertainty and Moral Hazard. American Economic Review Vol. 107, 6 (2017), 1430--76.
[42]
Xuanming Su. 2007. Intertemporal pricing with strategic customer behavior. Management Science, Vol. 53, 5 (2007), 726--741.
[43]
Ina A Taneva. 2015. Information design. University of Edinburgh (2015).
[44]
Peter Whittle. 1988. Restless bandits: Activity allocation in a changing world. Journal of applied probability (1988), 287--298.
[45]
Sandy Yu, Scott Johnson, Chiayu Lai, Antonio Cricelli, and Lee Fleming. 2017. Crowdfunding and regional entrepreneurial investment: an application of the CrowdBerkeley database. Research Policy, Vol. 46, 10 (2017), 1723--1737.
[46]
Yong-Pin Zhou, Ming Fan, and Minho Cho. 2005. On the threshold purchasing behavior of customers facing dynamically priced perishable products. University of Washington (2005).

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)Crowdfunding with Strategic Pricing and Information DisclosureProceedings of the Twenty-second International Symposium on Theory, Algorithmic Foundations, and Protocol Design for Mobile Networks and Mobile Computing10.1145/3466772.3467050(211-220)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2021
  • (2019)Civic crowdfunding for agents with negative valuations and agents with asymmetric beliefsProceedings of the 28th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence10.5555/3367032.3367063(208-214)Online publication date: 10-Aug-2019
  • (2019)Aggregating Citizen Preferences for Public Projects Through Civic CrowdfundingProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3306127.3331963(1919-1921)Online publication date: 8-May-2019

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
AAMAS '18: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems
July 2018
2312 pages

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

Publisher

International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

Richland, SC

Publication History

Published: 09 July 2018

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. bayesian persuasion
  2. crowdfunding
  3. information design
  4. signaling games

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

AAMAS '18
Sponsor:
AAMAS '18: Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems
July 10 - 15, 2018
Stockholm, Sweden

Acceptance Rates

AAMAS '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 149 of 607 submissions, 25%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,155 of 5,036 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)66
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)11
Reflects downloads up to 17 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)Crowdfunding with Strategic Pricing and Information DisclosureProceedings of the Twenty-second International Symposium on Theory, Algorithmic Foundations, and Protocol Design for Mobile Networks and Mobile Computing10.1145/3466772.3467050(211-220)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2021
  • (2019)Civic crowdfunding for agents with negative valuations and agents with asymmetric beliefsProceedings of the 28th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence10.5555/3367032.3367063(208-214)Online publication date: 10-Aug-2019
  • (2019)Aggregating Citizen Preferences for Public Projects Through Civic CrowdfundingProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3306127.3331963(1919-1921)Online publication date: 8-May-2019

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media