IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02966992.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparison of crowdsourcing platforms from social-psychological and motivational perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Tuba Bakici

    (ESC [Rennes] - ESC Rennes School of Business)

Abstract

The increasing need to compete in innovation and the prevalence of IT in social and economic interactions have led to greater globalization in innovation sourcing, particularly through online crowdsourcing platforms. Crowdsourcing platform participation, a phenomenon inadequately covered, is an instance of providing an innovative solution or idea intertwined with personal and social factors that interact to result in a behavior. A better understanding of the impact of social factors and participants' hedonic, utilitarian, and social motivationscan guide the design and management of these crowdsourcing platforms to foster sustained engagement. This study considered the competitive and social nature of these platforms and analyzed participation intentions from a novel standpoint—a combination of motivational and socio-cognitive perspectives and their relationships within two different types of crowdsourcing platforms: Atizo's third-party-hosted community and Nokia's brandhosted IdeasProject community. A comparison of these two types of crowdsourcing platforms for the same activity of ideation at an individual level revealed differences in behavior determinants based on the platform host type, domain specificity, and mechanisms supporting different motives and social factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Tuba Bakici, 2020. "Comparison of crowdsourcing platforms from social-psychological and motivational perspectives," Post-Print hal-02966992, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02966992
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102121
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://rennes-sb.hal.science/hal-02966992
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rennes-sb.hal.science/hal-02966992/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102121?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Childers, Terry L & Rao, Akshay R, 1992. "The Influence of Familial and Peer-Based Reference Groups on Consumer Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(2), pages 198-211, September.
    2. Norris F. Krueger Jr. & Deborah V. Brazeal, 1994. "Entrepreneurial Potential and Potential Entrepreneurs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 18(3), pages 91-104, April.
    3. Celine Schulz & Stefan Wagner, 2010. "Outlaw Community Innovations," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Stephen Flowers & Flis Henwood (ed.), Perspectives On User Innovation, chapter 8, pages 191-210, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 2017. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 549-568, June.
    5. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    6. Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Nripendra P. Rana & Anand Jeyaraj & Marc Clement & Michael D. Williams, 2019. "Re-examining the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): Towards a Revised Theoretical Model," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 719-734, June.
    7. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    8. Yuxiang Zhao & Qinghua Zhu, 2014. "Evaluation on crowdsourcing research: Current status and future direction," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 417-434, July.
    9. Oded Nov & Mor Naaman & Chen Ye, 2010. "Analysis of participation in an online photo‐sharing community: A multidimensional perspective," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(3), pages 555-566, March.
    10. Richard P. Bagozzi & Utpal M. Dholakia, 2006. "Open Source Software User Communities: A Study of Participation in Linux User Groups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1099-1115, July.
    11. Pee, L.G. & Koh, E. & Goh, M., 2018. "Trait motivations of crowdsourcing and task choice: A distal-proximal perspective," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 28-41.
    12. Oded Nov & Mor Naaman & Chen Ye, 2010. "Analysis of participation in an online photo-sharing community: A multidimensional perspective," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(3), pages 555-566, March.
    13. Krishnamurthy, Sandeep & Ou, Shaosong & Tripathi, Arvind K., 2014. "Acceptance of monetary rewards in open source software development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 632-644.
    14. Bruno S. Frey, 1992. "Tertium Datur: Pricing, Regulating and Intrinsic Motivation," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(2), pages 161-184, May.
    15. Sun, Yongqiang & Wang, Nan & Yin, Chunxiao & Zhang, Jacky Xi, 2015. "Understanding the relationships between motivators and effort in crowdsourcing marketplaces: A nonlinear analysis," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 267-276.
    16. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    17. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    18. Albors, J. & Ramos, J.C. & Hervas, J.L., 2008. "New learning network paradigms: Communities of objectives, crowdsourcing, wikis and open source," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 194-202.
    19. Shirley Taylor & Peter A. Todd, 1995. "Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 144-176, June.
    20. Alalwan, Ali Abdallah, 2020. "Mobile food ordering apps: An empirical study of the factors affecting customer e-satisfaction and continued intention to reuse," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 28-44.
    21. Lindič, Jaka & Baloh, Peter & Ribière, Vincent M. & Desouza, Kevin C., 2011. "Deploying information technologies for organizational innovation: Lessons from case studies," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 183-188.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Skare, Marinko & Gavurova, Beata & Polishchuk, Volodymyr, 2023. "A decision-making support model for financing start-up projects by venture capital funds on a crowdfunding platform," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Patel, Chirag & Ahmad Husairi, Mariyani & Haon, Christophe & Oberoi, Poonam, 2023. "Monetary rewards and self-selection in design crowdsourcing contests: Managing participation, contribution appropriateness, and winning trade-offs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hailiang Wang & Jiaxin Zhang & Yan Luximon & Mingfu Qin & Ping Geng & Da Tao, 2022. "The Determinants of User Acceptance of Mobile Medical Platforms: An Investigation Integrating the TPB, TAM, and Patient-Centered Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Kuttimani Tamilmani & Nripendra P. Rana & Robin Nunkoo & Vishnupriya Raghavan & Yogesh K. Dwivedi, 2022. "Indian Travellers’ Adoption of Airbnb Platform," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 77-96, February.
    3. Anastasiou Kartas & Sigi Goode, 2012. "Use, perceived deterrence and the role of software piracy in video game console adoption," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 261-277, April.
    4. Rishi Manrai & Kriti Priya Gupta, 2023. "Investor’s perceptions on artificial intelligence (AI) technology adoption in investment services in India," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 28(1), pages 1-14, March.
    5. Do Giang Nguyen & Minh-Tri Ha, 2022. "What Makes Users Continue to Want to Use the Digital Platform? Evidence From the Ride-Hailing Service Platform in Vietnam," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440211, January.
    6. Camilleri, Mark Anthony & Camilleri, Adriana Caterina, 2022. "Remote learning via video conferencing technologies: Implications for research and practice," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    7. Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Nripendra P. Rana & Anand Jeyaraj & Marc Clement & Michael D. Williams, 2019. "Re-examining the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): Towards a Revised Theoretical Model," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 719-734, June.
    8. Tsai, Juin-Ming & Hung, Shiu-Wan & Yang, Ting-Ting, 2020. "In pursuit of goodwill? The cross-level effects of social enterprise consumer behaviours," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 350-361.
    9. Jaeki Song & Fatemeh Mariam Zahedi, 2005. "A Theoretical Approach to Web Design in E-Commerce: A Belief Reinforcement Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(8), pages 1219-1235, August.
    10. Hasan, Rajibul & Lowe, Ben & Petrovici, Dan, 2020. "Consumer adoption of pro-poor service innovations in subsistence marketplaces," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 461-475.
    11. Paul Juinn Bing Tan, 2013. "Applying the UTAUT to Understand Factors Affecting the Use of English E-Learning Websites in Taiwan," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(4), pages 21582440135, October.
    12. Livio Cricelli & Michele Grimaldi & Silvia Vermicelli, 2022. "Crowdsourcing and open innovation: a systematic literature review, an integrated framework and a research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1269-1310, July.
    13. Venkatesh, Viswanath & Maruping, Likoebe M. & Brown, Susan A., 2006. "Role of time in self-prediction of behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 160-176, July.
    14. Alalwan, Ali Abdallah & Baabdullah, Abdullah M. & Rana, Nripendra P. & Tamilmani, Kuttimani & Dwivedi, Yogesh K., 2018. "Examining adoption of mobile internet in Saudi Arabia: Extending TAM with perceived enjoyment, innovativeness and trust," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 100-110.
    15. Garima Malik & A. Sajeevan Rao, 2019. "Extended expectation-confirmation model to predict continued usage of ODR/ride hailing apps: role of perceived value and self-efficacy," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 461-482, December.
    16. Borhan, Muhamad Nazri & Ibrahim, Ahmad Nazrul Hakimi & Miskeen, Manssour A. Abdulasalm, 2019. "Extending the theory of planned behaviour to predict the intention to take the new high-speed rail for intercity travel in Libya: Assessment of the influence of novelty seeking, trust and external inf," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 373-384.
    17. Fernanda Leão Ramos & Jorge Brantes Ferreira & Angilberto Sabino de Freitas & Juliana Werneck Rodrigues, 2018. "The Effect of Trust in the Intention to Use m-banking," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 15(2), pages 175-191, March.
    18. Chia-Chien Hsu & Brian Sandford & Chia-Ju Ling & Ching-Torng Lin, 2021. "Can the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) Help Explain Subjective Well-Being in Senior Citizens due to Gateball Participation?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-15, August.
    19. Jeeyeon Jeong & Yaeri Kim & Taewoo Roh, 2021. "Do Consumers Care About Aesthetics and Compatibility? The Intention to Use Wearable Devices in Health Care," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    20. Sanjeev Verma, 2015. "Harnessing the Benefit of Social Networking Sites for Intentional Social Action: Determinants and Challenges," Vision, , vol. 19(2), pages 104-111, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02966992. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.