IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03152411.html

Experts in the crowd and their influence on herding in reward-based crowdfunding of cultural projects

Author

Listed:
  • Aurélien Petit

    (MAGELLAN - Laboratoire de Recherche Magellan - UJML - Université Jean Moulin - Lyon 3 - Université de Lyon - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises (IAE) - Lyon)

  • Peter Wirtz

    (MAGELLAN - Laboratoire de Recherche Magellan - UJML - Université Jean Moulin - Lyon 3 - Université de Lyon - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises (IAE) - Lyon)

Abstract

The present research investigates certification effects and rational herding in reward-based crowdfunding (RBCF) campaigns of cultural projects. Culture is a domain where expert opinion traditionally plays an important role. Consequently, to test the role of experts in collective behaviour and outcomes of crowdfunding campaigns, RBCF of cultural projects is a particularly relevant field. The authors analyse data obtained from France’s leading RBCF platform, Ulule, and show that the contributing crowd is heterogeneous, both in terms of expertise and willingness to follow information cascades. Testing the impact of different backer categories on (1) campaign success, (2) composition of the crowd and (3) overall day-by-day funding dynamics, the study provides evidence of the existence of both a certification effect at the very beginning of a funding campaign, and dynamic herding later all along the campaign. Contributions from expert backers, whether specialized in the same creative industry as a given project or not, trigger additional contributions and improve the success probability of a funding campaign. Senior experts follow other senior experts, which supports normative social influence and, when specialized, they follow other specialized senior experts, which highlights taste-based homophily. We also show that junior experts, i.e. future serial backers, follow senior experts, particularly when specialized, which supports informational social influence. Experts hence lead the crowd in their decision to contribute to cultural projects, and those who follow them are mostly senior experts themselves and apprentice experts, not one-time contributors, which suggests the existence of community logic and rational information cascades in RBCF.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Aurélien Petit & Peter Wirtz, 2021. "Experts in the crowd and their influence on herding in reward-based crowdfunding of cultural projects," Post-Print hal-03152411, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03152411
    DOI: 10.1007/s11187-020-00424-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Carole Gresse & Hugo Marin, 2022. "Geographical Proximity and Enhanced Attention in P2B Crowdlending Strategies," Post-Print hal-03960132, HAL.
    2. Gabriel Rodríguez-Garnica & María Gutiérrez-Urtiaga & Josep A. Tribo, 2025. "Signaling and herding in reward-based crowdfunding," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 64(3), pages 889-916, March.
    3. Eric Tassel, 2023. "Crowdfunding investors, intermediaries and risky entrepreneurs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 1033-1050, March.
    4. Yuji Honjo & Koki Kurihara, 2024. "Target for campaign success: an empirical analysis of equity crowdfunding in Japan," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 926-958, June.
    5. Lars Hornuf & Johannes Voshaar, 2024. "What Is an Effective Signal in Crowdfunding? Evidence from Expert Researchers and a Meta-Study," CESifo Working Paper Series 11501, CESifo.
    6. Bonini, Stefano & Capizzi, Vincenzo & Giudici, Giancarlo & Tenca, Francesca, 2025. "(Im)perfect Substitutes: Business angels and crowd sourced start-up funding," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    7. Zhao, Liang & Sun, Zhe & Chen, Si & Gugnani, Ritika & Sahore, Nidhi, 2024. "Social media opinion leaders and information diffusion of crowdfunding projects: Evidence from China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    8. Efrat, Kalanit & Gilboa, Shaked & Wald, Andreas, 2025. "Loyal to the concept or to the platform? The complexity of the dual loyalty of crowdfunding backers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    9. Howe, Lauren C. & Menges, Jochen I., 2025. "Pitch imperfect: How investors respond to entrepreneur disclosure of personal flaws," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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-03152411. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.