Abstract
Abstract. Crowdfunding enables fundraising of various ventures by collecting money from several donors. We argue that the inclusion of prosocial language contributes to success in this new domain of resource acquisition. In Study 1, we analyzed 164,056 projects from the online crowdfunding platform Kickstarter and found that the higher the percentage of prosocial words employed in a project’s description, the larger the number of investors and the greater the chances of reaching a funding goal. In Study 2 (N = 234), an experimental study, we documented that the use of prosocial words increases the support people thought they would give to a project. Our results indicate that people want to invest their financial resources in ventures that contribute to prosocial goals.
References
(2009). Why do people give? The role of identity in giving. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 267–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.010
(2006). Measuring happiness with a single-item scale. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 34, 139–150. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2006.34.2.139
(2011). The bigger one of the “Big Two”? Preferential processing of communal information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 935–948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.028
(2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 751–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.751
. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.kickstarter.com/about
(2015). Crowdfunding: Geography, social networks, and the timing of investment decisions. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 24, 253–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/jems.12093
(2013). Making a difference matters: Impact unlocks the emotional benefits of prosocial spending. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 88, 90–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2013.01.008
(2015). Crowdfunding in a prosocial microlending environment: Examining the role of intrinsic versus extrinsic cues. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 39, 53–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12108
(2014, June 2–4). How to ask for a favor: A case study on the success of altruistic requests. Paper presented at the Eighth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. Retrieved from https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM14/paper/view/8106
(1995).
Testing for stress and happiness: The role of social and cognitive factors . In C. D. SpielbergerI. G. SarasonEds., Stress and emotion (pp. 173–187). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.(2009). Conceptual consumption. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 475–499. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163536
(2016). When payment undermines the pitch. Psychological Science, 27, 1388–1397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616638841
(2014). Selfish or selfless? On the signal value of emotion in altruistic behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 393–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037207
(2013). Top 10 crowdfunding sites for fundraising, Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/chancebarnett/2013/05/08/top-10-crowdfunding-sites-for-fundraising/#82f03ee1cfbd
(2003). Trust, accreditation, and philanthropy in the Netherlands. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 32, 596–615. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764003258102
(2014). Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. Journal of Business Venturing, 29, 585–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.07.003
(2009). Reevaluating the need for concern regarding noncoverage bias in landline surveys. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 1806–1810. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2008.152835
(1981). Helping behavior as affected by type of request and identity of caller. The Journal of Social Psychology, 115, 95–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1981.9711992
(2011). Microlending in emerging economies: Building a new line of inquiry from the ground up. Journal of International Business Studies, 42, 718–739. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2010.58
(1988). Positive mood and helping behavior: A test of six hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.2.211
(1997). Reinterpreting the empathy-altruism relationship: when one into one equals oneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 481–494. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9294898
(2015). Does the possibility to make equity investments in crowdfunding projects crowd out reward-based investments? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39, 145–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12139
(2015). Are samples drawn from Mechanical Turk valid for research on political ideology? Research & Politics, 2, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168015622072
(2015). The determinants of crowdfunding success: Evidence from technology projects. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 181, 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.872
(2011). No good deed goes unquestioned: Cynical reconstruals maintain belief in the power of self-interest. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1207–1213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.05.001
. (2016). Retrieved April 19, 2017, from https://artofthekickstart.com/crowdfunding-demographics-statistics-infographic/
(2013). Corpus of Global Web-Based English: 1.9 billion words from speakers in 20 countries (GloWbE), Retrieved from http://corpus.byu.edu/glowbe/
(2008). Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science, 319, 1687–1688. Retrieved from http://science.sciencemag.org/content/319/5870/1687
(2013). Charitable giving as a signal of trustworthiness: Disentangling the signaling benefits of altruistic acts. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34, 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.11.005
(2012). Mixed reasons, missed givings: The costs of blending egoistic and altruistic reasons in donation requests. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1322–1328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.05.014
(2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
(2015). Capturing socially motivated linguistic change: How the use of gender-fair language affects support for social initiatives in Austria and Poland. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1617. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01617
(2015). A decline in prosocial language helps explain public disapproval of the US Congress. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112, 6591–6594. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1500355112
(2012). Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 2–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024338
(1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 299–307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.2.299
(2015). Gender and the language of crowdfunding, Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2549354
(2014). Paying it forward: Generalized reciprocity and the limits of generosity. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 143, 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031047
(2014). Biases in news media as reflected by personal pronouns in evaluative contexts. Social Psychology, 45, 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000165
(2007). Neural responses to taxation and voluntary giving reveal motives for charitable donations. Science, 316, 145–1625. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1140738
(1984). Verbal style and the presidency. New York, NY: Academic Press.
(2001).
Redeveloping DICTION: Theoretical considerations . In M. D. WestEd., Theory, method, and practice in computer content analysis (pp. 43–60). New York, NY: Springer.(2010). Diction 6.0 manual. Austin, TX: Digitext.
(2016). Attentive Turkers: MTurk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 400–407. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0578-z
(2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
(2011). Tell me a good story and I may lend you my money: The role of narratives in peer-to-peer lending decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.48.SPL.S138
(2010). The labor economics of paid crowdsourcing. Proceedings of the 11th ACM conference on Electronic commerce – EC ’10. New York, NY: ACM Press, 209. https://doi.org/10.1145/1807342.1807376
(1992). Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 22, 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/0095-0696(92)90019-S
(2013). Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 5802–5805. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218772110
(2016).
A Review of crowdfunding research and findings . In P. GolderD. MitraEds., Handbook of new product development research. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2685739(2008). The happiness of giving: The time-ask effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 543–557. https://doi.org/10.1086/588699
(2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7, 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.19
(2014). The Stanford CoreNLP Natural Language Processing Toolkit. Proceedings of 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations. Stroudsburg, PA: The Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/P14–5010
(2014). Gender dynamics in crowdfunding (Kickstarter). SSRN Working Paper No 2442954, 430, 1–75. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2442954
(1996). Male-female differences: A computer simulation. The American Psychologist, 51, 157–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.157
(2007). Do the stories they tell get them the money they need? The role of entrepreneurial narratives in resource acquisition. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1107–1132. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2007.27169488
(2012). Shielding women against status loss: The masculine form and its alternatives in Italian language. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31, 311–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X12446599
. (2015). The Crowdfunding Industry Report – 2013CF, 2015, (pp. 1–97). Retrieved from http://reports.crowdsourcing.org/index.php??route=product/product&product_id=54
(2010). Sensation seeking and psychological reactance as health risk predictors for an emerging adult population. Health Communication, 25, 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410231003698945
(2014).
The language that gets people to give: Phrases that predict success on Kickstarter . In S. FussellW. LuttersEds., Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW’14) (pp. 49–61). New York, NY: ACM.(2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.06.005
(1998–2009). Mplus user’s guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén and Muthén.
(2014). Tainted altruism: When doing some good is evaluated as worse than doing no good at all. Psychological Science, 25, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504785
(1976). Effects of making blood donor motives salient upon donor retention: A field experiment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 99–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616727600300117
(2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041
(2005). Prosocial behaviour: Multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 365–392. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070141
(2014). Non-profit differentials in crowd-based financing: Evidence from 50,000 campaigns. Economics Letters, 123, 391–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2014.03.022
. (2010). Princeton University “About WordNet.” WordNet.: WordNet 3.0 Reference Manual – Glossary of WordNet terms, Retrieved from https://wordnet.princeton.edu/man/wngloss.7WN.html
(2013). Buyers pay for and sellers invest in a good reputation: More evidence from eBay. Journal of Socio-Economics, 42, 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2012.11.004
(2015).
Project recommendetion using heterogeneous traits in crowdfunding . In D. QuerciaB. HoganEds., Proceedings of the Ninth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM 2015) (pp. 337–346). Palo Alto, CA: AAAI Press.(2015). Crowdfunding as a social movement: The determinants of success in Kickstarter campaigns. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–39. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2631320
(2016). Helping others or oneself: How direction of comparison affects prosocial behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26, 461–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2016.02.002
(2013). Personality, gender, and age in the language of social media: The open-vocabulary approach. PLoS One, 8. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073791
(2013). The JOBS Act and crowdfunding: Harnessing the power-and money-of the masses. Business Horizons, 56, 271–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2013.01.007
(2000). Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: Power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53, 1119–1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(00)00242-0
(2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 24–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676
(1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3397865
(2016). Both selfishness and selflessness start with the self: How wealth shapes responses to charitable appeals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 242–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.11.009
(2009). Self-benefit versus other-benefit marketing appeals: Their effectiveness in generating charitable support. Journal of Marketing, 73, 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.4.109
