Startseite How to Bid Success in Crowdsourcing Contest? ― Evidence from the Translation Tasks of Tripadvisor
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

How to Bid Success in Crowdsourcing Contest? ― Evidence from the Translation Tasks of Tripadvisor

  • Kunxiang Dong EMAIL logo , Yan Sun , Zongxiao Xie und Jie Zhen
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 17. Mai 2020
Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Material incentive is the main motivation for solvers to attend crowdsourcing tasks. So raising the bidding success rate is benefit to inspire the solvers attendance’ and increase the answering quality. This paper analyzes the effect of participation experience, task-fit capability, participation strategy and task attribute on the solvers bidding success by the solvers attending the series tasks of Tripadvisor. The results show that: 1) Participation times enrich the participation experiences and promote the bidding success, while bidding success times and last performances lower the bidding success because of the cognitive fixation; 2) The chance of bidding success will be increase when the solver own high task-fit capability; 3) The relationship between task submit sequence and bidding success is the type of reverse U shape, and the optimal submit sequence rate on the top of the reverse U shape; 4) Higher task difficulty lower bidding success, while higher task density easier bidding success.


Supported by National Social Science Foundation of China (17CGL019)


Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the editor and two anonymous referees for their insightful comments and helpful suggestions that led to a marked improvement of the article.

References

[1] Howe J. The rise of crowdsourcing. Wired magazine, 2006, 14(6): 1–4.Suche in Google Scholar

[2] Afuah A, Tucci C L. Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Academy of Management Review, 2012, 37(3): 355–375.10.5465/amr.2010.0146Suche in Google Scholar

[3] Blohm I, Leimeister J M, Krcmar H. Crowdsourcing: How to benefit from (too) many great ideas. MIS Quarterly Executive, 2013, 12(4): 199–211.Suche in Google Scholar

[4] Geiger D, Schader M. Personalized task recommendation in crowdsourcing information systems ― Current state of the art. Decision Support Systems, 2014, 65: 3–16.10.1016/j.dss.2014.05.007Suche in Google Scholar

[5] Lüttgens D, Pollok P, Antons D, et al. Wisdom of the crowd and capabilities of a few: Internal success factors of crowdsourcing for innovation. Journal of Business Economics, 2014, 84(3): 339–374.10.1007/s11573-014-0723-7Suche in Google Scholar

[6] Eickhoff C, de Vries A P. Increasing cheat robustness of crowdsourcing tasks. Information Retrieval, 2013, 16(2): 121–137.10.1007/s10791-011-9181-9Suche in Google Scholar

[7] Terwiesch C, Xu Y. Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problem solving. Management Science, 2008, 54(9): 1529–1543.10.1287/mnsc.1080.0884Suche in Google Scholar

[8] Barnes S A, Green A, de Hoyos M. Crowdsourcing and work: Individual factors and circumstances influencing employability. New Technology, Work and Employment, 2015, 30(1): 16–31.10.1111/ntwe.12043Suche in Google Scholar

[9] Khasraghi H J, Aghaie A. Crowdsourcing contests: Understanding the effect of competitors’ participation history on their performance. Behaviour & Information Technology, 2014, 33(12): 1383–1395.10.1080/0144929X.2014.883551Suche in Google Scholar

[10] Mahr D, Rindfleisch A, Slotegraaf R J. Enhancing crowdsourcing success: The role of creative and deliberate problem-solving styles. Customer Needs and Solutions, 2015, 2(3): 209–221.10.1007/s40547-015-0038-zSuche in Google Scholar

[11] Shao B, Shi L, Xu B, et al. Factors affecting participation of solvers in crowdsourcing: An empirical study from China. Electronic Markets, 2012, 22(2): 73–82.10.1007/s12525-012-0093-3Suche in Google Scholar

[12] Goodman J K, Paolacci G. Crowdsourcing consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 2017, 44(1): 196–210.10.1093/jcr/ucx047Suche in Google Scholar

[13] Yang Y, Chen P Y, Banker R. Impact of past performance and strategic bidding on winner determination of open innovation contest. Workshop on Information Systems and Economics (WISE 2010), 2010, 2010: 11–20.Suche in Google Scholar

[14] Kohler T, Chesbrough H. From collaborative community to competitive market: The quest to build a crowdsourcing platform for social innovation. R & D Management, 2019, 49(3): 356–368.10.1111/radm.12372Suche in Google Scholar

[15] Sun Y, Fang Y, Lim K H. Understanding sustained participation in transactional virtual communities. Decision Support Systems, 2012, 53(1): 12–22.10.1016/j.dss.2011.10.006Suche in Google Scholar

[16] Bayus B L. Crowdsourcing new product ideas over time: An analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm community. Management Science, 2013, 59(1): 226–244.10.1287/mnsc.1120.1599Suche in Google Scholar

[17] Yang Y, Chen P Y, Pavlou P. Open innovation: An empirical study of online contests. ICIS 2009 Proceedings, 2009: 13–20.Suche in Google Scholar

[18] Gefen D, Gefen G, Carmel E. How project description length and expected duration affect bidding and project success in crowdsourcing software development. Journal of Systems and Software, 2016, 116: 75–84.10.1016/j.jss.2015.03.039Suche in Google Scholar

[19] Bockstedt J, Mishra A, Druehl C. Do participation strategy and experience impact the likelihood of winning in unblind innovation contests?. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2011, 89(3): 370–371.10.2139/ssrn.1961244Suche in Google Scholar

[20] Guo W, Straub D, Zhang P. Understanding vendor selection in crowdsourcing marketplace: A matter of vendor-task fit and swift trust, 2014: 1–17. https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1687&context=amcis2014.10.1155/2014/987690Suche in Google Scholar

[21] Hogarth R M, Einhorn H J. Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 1992, 24(1): 1–55.10.1016/0010-0285(92)90002-JSuche in Google Scholar

[22] Pennington N, Hastie R. Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 51(2): 242–258.10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.242Suche in Google Scholar

[23] Yang J, Adamic L A, Ackerman M S. Crowdsourcing and knowledge sharing: Strategic user behavior on taskcn. Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Electronic Commerce, ACM, 2008: 246–255.10.1145/1386790.1386829Suche in Google Scholar

[24] Liu T X, Yang J, Adamic L A, et al. Crowdsourcing with all-pay auctions: A field experiment on taskcn. Management Science, 2014, 60(8): 2020–2037.10.1287/mnsc.2013.1845Suche in Google Scholar

[25] Morschheuser B, Hamari J, Maedche A. Cooperation or competition-when do people contribute more? A field experiment on gamification of crowdsourcing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2019, 127: 7–24.10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.10.001Suche in Google Scholar

[26] Brabham D C. Motivations for participation in a crowdsourcing application to improve public engagement in transit planning. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 2012, 40(3): 307–328.10.1080/00909882.2012.693940Suche in Google Scholar

[27] Zheng H, Li D, Hou W. Task design, motivation, and participation in crowdsourcing contests. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2011, 15(4): 57–88.10.2753/JEC1086-4415150402Suche in Google Scholar

[28] Huang Y, Vir Singh P, Srinivasan K. Crowdsourcing new product ideas under consumer learning. Management Science, 2014, 60(9): 2138–2159.10.1287/mnsc.2013.1879Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2019-08-02
Accepted: 2019-10-16
Published Online: 2020-05-17
Published in Print: 2020-05-26

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 20.11.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.21078/JSSI-2020-170-15/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen