Impact of Project Updates and Their Social Endorsement in Online Medical Crowdfunding

References

• Acock, A.C. Discovering structural equation modeling using stata. Stata Press Books (2013).
   Google Scholar
• Alegre, I., and Moleskis, M. Beyond financial motivations in crowdfunding: A systematic literature review of donations and rewards. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 32, 2 (2021), 276–287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreychik, M.R., and Lewis, E. Will you help me to suffer less? How about to feel more joy? Positive and negative empathy are associated with different other-oriented motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 105 (2017), 139–149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreychik, M.R., and Migliaccio, N. Empathizing with others’ pain versus empathizing with others’ joy: Examining the separability of positive and negative empathy and their relation to different types of social behaviors and social emotions. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 37, 5 (2015), 274–291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anglin, A.H., Short, J.C., Drover, W., Stevenson, R.M., McKenny, A.F., and Allison, T.H. The power of positivity? The influence of positive psychological capital language on crowdfunding performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 33, 4 (2018), 470–492.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angraal, S., Zachariah, A.G., Raaisa, R., Khera, R., Rao, P., Krumholz, H.M., and Spertus, J.A. Evaluation of internet-based crowdsourced fundraising to cover health care costs in the united states. JAMA Network Open, 4, 1 (2021), e2033157–e2033157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ba, Z., Zhao, Y., Song, S., and Zhu, Q. Understanding the determinants of online medical crowdfunding project success in China. Information Processing & Management, 58, 2 (2021), 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batson, C.D., Eklund, J.H., Chermok, V.L., Hoyt, J.L., and Ortiz, B.G. An additional antecedent of empathic concern: Valuing the welfare of the person in need. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 1 (2007), 65–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaulieu, T., Sarker, S., and Sarker, S. A conceptual framework for understanding crowdfunding. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37, 1 (2015), 1.
   Google Scholar
• Belsky, J., Hsieh, K.-H., and Crnic, K. Infant positive and negative emotionality: One dimension or two? Developmental Psychology, 32, 2 (1996), 289–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berliner, L.S., and Kenworthy, N.J. Producing a worthy illness: Personal crowdfunding amidst financial crisis. Social Science & Medicine, 187 (2017), 233–242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogardus, E.S. A social distance scale. Sociology & Social Research, 17 (1933), 265–271.
   Google Scholar
• Borgatti, S.P., and Halgin, D.S. On network theory. Organization Science, 22, 5 (2011), 1168–1181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burtch, G., and Chan, J. Investigating the relationship between medical crowdfunding and personal bankruptcy in the united states: Evidence of a digital divide. MIS Quarterly, 43, 1 (2019), 237–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burtch, G., Ghose, A., and Wattal, S. An empirical examination of the antecedents and consequences of contribution patterns in crowd-funded markets. Information Systems Research, 24, 3 (2013), 499–519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burtch, G., Hong, Y., and Liu, D. The role of provision points in online crowdfunding. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35, 1 (2018), 117–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan, C.R., Pethe, C., and Skiena, S. Natural language processing versus rule-based text analysis: Comparing bert score and readability indices to predict crowdfunding outcomes. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 16 (2021), e00276.
   Google Scholar
• Chou, E.Y., and Murnighan, J.K. Life or death decisions: Framing the call for help. PLOS ONE, 8, 3 (2013), e57351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G., and Aiken, L.S. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Psychology Press, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Constant, D., Sproull, L., and Kiesler, S. The kindness of strangers: The usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organization Science, 7, 2 (1996), 119–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Courtney, C., Dutta, S., and Li, Y. Resolving information asymmetry: Signaling, endorsement, and crowdfunding success. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41, 2 (2017), 265–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cryder, C.E., Loewenstein, G., and Seltman, H. Goal gradient in helping behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 6 (2013), 1078–1083.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dai, H., and Zhang, D.J. Prosocial goal pursuit in crowdfunding: Evidence from kickstarter. Journal of Marketing Research, 56, 3 (2019), 498–517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehejia, R.H., and Wahba, S. Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. Review of Economics and statistics, 84, 1 (2002), 151–161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickert, S., and Slovic, P. Attentional mechanisms in the generation of sympathy. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 4 (2009), 297–306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dovidio, J.F. Helping behavior and altruism: An empirical and conceptual overview. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 17 (1984), 361–427.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Escalas, J.E., and Stern, B.B. Sympathy and empathy: Emotional responses to advertising dramas. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 4 (2003), 566–578.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, R.J., Vandenbosch, M., and Antia, K.D. An empathy-helping perspective on consumers’ responses to fund-raising appeals. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 3 (2008), 519–531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedrich, J., and McGuire, A. Individual differences in reasoning style as a moderator of the identifiable victim effect. Social Influence, 5, 3 (2010), 182–201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galak, J., Small, D., and Stephen, A.T. Microfinance decision making: A field study of prosocial lending. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, SPL (2011), S130–S137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao, F., Li, X., Cheng, Y., and Hu, Y.J. Ladies first, gentlemen third! The effect of narrative perspective on medical crowdfunding. SSRN Electronic Journal (2019).
   Google Scholar
• Garcia, S.M., Weaver, K., Moskowitz, G.B., and Darley, J.M. Crowded minds: The implicit bystander effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 4 (2002), 843–853.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gefen, D., Rigdon, E.E., and Straub, D.W. An updated and extensions to sem guidelines for administrative and social science research. MIS Quarterly, 35, 2 (2011), iii–xiv.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleasure, R., Conboy, K., and Morgan, L. Talking up a storm: How backers use public discourse to exert control in crowdfunded systems development projects. Information Systems Research, 30, 2 (2019), 447–465.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleasure, R., and Feller, J. Does heart or head rule donor behaviors in charitable crowdfunding markets? International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 20, 4 (2016), 499–524.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granovetter, M.S. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 6 (1973), 1360–1380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenberg, J., and Mollick, E. Activist choice homophily and the crowdfunding of female founders. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62, 2 (2017), 341–374.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M., and Ringle, C.M. When to use and how to report the results of pls-sem. European Business Review, 31, 1 (2019), 2–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harmon‐Jones, E. Clarifying the emotive functions of asymmetrical frontal cortical activity. Psychophysiology, 40, 6 (2003), 838–848.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassna, G., Burtch, G., Lee, C.H., and Zhao, J.L. Understanding the role of lead donor types in civic crowdfunding. Available at SSRN 3175916 (2018).
   Google Scholar
• Haythornthwaite, C. Strong, weak, and latent ties and the impact of new media. The Information Society, 18, 5 (2002), 385–401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., and Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 1 (2015), 115–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hilbig, B.E. Sad, thus true: Negativity bias in judgments of truth. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 4 (2009), 983–986.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, Y., Hu, Y., and Burtch, G. Embeddedness, pro-sociality, and social influence: Evidence from online crowdfunding. MIS Quarterly, 42, 4 (2018), 1211–1224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, Y., Pavlou, P.A., Shi, N., and Wang, K. On the role of fairness and social distance in designing effective social referral systems. MIS Quarterly, 41, 3 (2017), 787–809.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou, J., Zhang, J., and Zhang, K. Pictures that are worth a thousand donations: How emotions in project images drive the success of online charity fundraising campaigns? An image design perspective. MIS Quarterly, 47, 2 (2023), 535–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsee, C.K., and Rottenstreich, Y. Music, pandas, and muggers: On the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 1 (2004), 23–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hur, Y.Y., Jin, F., Li, X., Cheng, Y., and Hu, Y.J. Does social influence change with other information sources? A large-scale randomized experiment in medical crowdfunding. Information Systems Research, 34, 4 (2023), 1476–1492.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iacus, S.M., King, G., and Porro, G. Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political Analysis, 20, 1 (2012), 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenni, K., and Loewenstein, G. Explaining the identifiable victim effect. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14, 3 (1997), 235–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang, Y., Ho, Y.-C., Yan, X., and Tan, Y. Investor platform choice: Herding, platform attributes, and regulations. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35, 1 (2018), 86–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenworthy, N., Dong, Z., Montgomery, A., Fuller, E., and Berliner, L. A cross-sectional study of social inequities in medical crowdfunding campaigns in the united states. PLOS ONE, 15, 3 (2020), e0229760.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, J.G., Kong, H.-K., Hong, H., and Karahalios, K. Enriched social translucence in medical crowdfunding. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference, 2020, pp. 1465–1477.
   Google Scholar
• Kogut, T., and Ritov, I. The “identified victim” effect: An identified group, or just a single individual? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 3 (2005), 157–167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kogut, T., and Ritov, I. The singularity effect of identified victims in separate and joint evaluations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 2 (2005), 106–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kokkodis, M., and Lappas, T. Your hometown matters: Popularity-difference bias in online reputation platforms. Information Systems Research, 31, 2 (2020), 412–430.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lacey, H.P., Fagerlin, A., Loewenstein, G., Smith, D.M., Riis, J., and Ubel, P.A. It must be awful for them: Perspective and task context affects ratings for health conditions. Judgment and Decision Making, 1, 2 (2006), 146–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laufer, D., Silvera, D.H., Brad McBride, J., and Schertzer, S.M. Communicating charity successes across cultures: Highlighting individual or collective achievement? European Journal of Marketing, 44, 9/10 (2010), 1322–1333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, J.A., and Murnighan, J.K. The empathy‐prospect model and thecchoice to help. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 4 (2001), 816–839.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, M., Cassidy, C., Brazier, G., and Reicher, S. Self‐categorization and bystander non‐intervention: Two experimental studies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 7 (2002), 1452–1463.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewbel, A. Using heteroscedasticity to identify and estimate mismeasured and endogenous regressor models. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 30, 1 (2012), 67–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, M., and Viswanathan, S. Home bias in online investments: An empirical study of an online crowdfunding market. Management Science, 62, 5 (2016), 1393–1414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, Y., Yao, D., and Chen, X. Happiness begets money: Emotion and engagement in live streaming. Journal of Marketing Research, 58, 3 (2021), 417–438.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindauer, M., Mayorga, M., Greene, J.D., Slovic, P., Västfjäll, D., and Singer, P. Comparing the effect of rational and emotional appeals on donation behavior. Judgment and Decision Making, 15, 3 (2020), 413–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, D., Brass, D., Lu, Y., and Chen, D. Friendships in online peer-to-peer lending: Pipes, prisms, and social herding. MIS Quarterly, 39, 3 (2015), 729–742.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, L., Suh, A., and Wagner, C. Empathy or perceived credibility? An empirical study on individual donation behavior in charitable crowdfunding. Internet Research, 28, 3 (2018), 623–651.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loewenstein, G., and Small, D.A. The scarecrow and the tin man: The vicissitudes of human sympathy and caring. Review of General Psychology, 11, 2 (2007), 112–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majumdar, A., and Bose, I. My words for your pizza: An analysis of persuasive narratives in online crowdfunding. Information & Management, 55, 6 (2018), 781–794.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markus, H.R., and Kitayama, S. Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 2 (1991), 224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCune, B., Grace, J.B., and Urban, D.L. Analysis of ecological communities. MjM software design Gleneden Beach, OR, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Mejia, J., Urrea, G., and Pedraza‐Martinez, A.J. Operational transparency on crowdfunding platforms: Effect on donations for emergency response. Production and Operations Management, 28, 7 (2019), 1773–1791.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitra, S., and Ransbotham, S. Information disclosure and the diffusion of information security attacks. Information Systems Research, 26, 3 (2015), 565–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, J., Kim, K., and Hong, Y.-Y. Beauty, gender, and charitable giving. SSRN Electronic Journal (2019).
   Google Scholar
• Peng, F., Feng, F., and McCallum, A. Chinese segmentation and new word detection using conditional random fields. COLING 2004: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 2004, pp. 562–568.
   Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J.W., Boyd, R.L., Jordan, K., and Blackburn, K. The development and psychometric properties of liwc2015. 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Perry-Smith, J.E., and Mannucci, P.V. From creativity to innovation: The social network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey. Academy of Management Review, 42, 1 (2017), 53–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petter, S., Straub, D., and Rai, A. Specifying formative constructs in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 31, 4 (2007), 623–656.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podolny, J.M. Networks as the pipes and prisms of the market. American Journal of Sociology, 107, 1 (2001), 33–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proelss, J., Schweizer, D., and Zhou, T. Economics of philanthropy—evidence from health crowdfunding. Small Business Economics, 57, 2 (2021), 999–1026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radfar, M., Ahmadi, F., and Fallahi Khoshknab, M. Turbulent life: The experiences of the family members of patients suffering from depression. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 21, 3 (2014), 249–256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, S., Wentzel, D., Hopp, C., and Kaminski, J. Launching for success: The effects of psychological distance and mental simulation on funding decisions and crowdfunding performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 36, 6 (2021), 106021.
   Google Scholar
• Saleh, S.N., Ajufo, E., Lehmann, C.U., and Medford, R.J. A comparison of online medical crowdfunding in canada, the uk, and the us. JAMA Network Open, 3, 10 (2020), e2021684–e2021684.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shang, G., Pekgün, P., Ferguson, M., and Galbreth, M. How much do online consumers really value free product returns? Evidence from ebay. Journal of Operations Management, 53 (2017), 45–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siering, M., Koch, J.-A., and Deokar, A.V. Detecting fraudulent behavior on crowdfunding platforms: The role of linguistic and content-based cues in static and dynamic contexts. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33, 2 (2016), 421–455.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Small, D.A. Reference-dependent sympathy. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112, 2 (2010), 151–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Small, D.A. Sympathy biases and sympathy appeals: Reducing social distance to boost charitable contributions. In, Oppenheimer, D.M., and Olivola, C.Y., (eds.), The science of giving: Experimental approaches to the study of charity, New York: Taylor & Francis, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Small, D.A., and Loewenstein, G. Helping a victim or helping the victim: Altruism and identifiability. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26, 1 (2003), 5–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Small, D.A., Loewenstein, G., and Slovic, P. Sympathy and callousness: The impact of deliberative thought on donations to identifiable and statistical victims. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102, 2 (2007), 143–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Small, D.A., and Verrochi, N.M. The face of need: Facial emotion expression on charity advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 46, 6 (2009), 777–787.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stock, J., and Yogo, M. Testing for weak instruments in linear iv regression. (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Stuart, E.A. Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical Science: A Review Journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 25, 1 (2010), 1–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sudhir, K., Roy, S., and Cherian, M. Do sympathy biases induce charitable giving? The effects of advertising content. Marketing Science, 35, 6 (2016), 849–869.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Susarla, A., Oh, J.-H., and Tan, Y. Influentials, imitables, or susceptibles? Virality and word-of-mouth conversations in online social networks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33, 1 (2016), 139–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takamatsu, R. Personality correlates and utilitarian judgments in the everyday context: Psychopathic traits and differential effects of empathy, social dominance orientation, and dehumanization beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 146 (2019), 1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torelli, C.J. Individuality or conformity? The effect of independent and interdependent self-concepts on public judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16, 3 (2006), 240–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, X., Jiang, M., Han, W., and Qiu, L. Do emotions sell? The impact of emotional expressions on sales in the space‐sharing economy. Production and Operations Management, 31, 1 (2022), 65–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wellman, B., and Wortley, S. Different strokes from different folks: Community ties and social support. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 3 (1990), 558–588.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Y., Zhang, X., and Xiao, Q. Appeal to the head and heart: The persuasive effects of medical crowdfunding charitable appeals on willingness to donate. Information Processing & Management, 59, 1 (2022), 102792.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiang, D., Zhang, L., Tao, Q., Wang, Y., and Ma, S. Informational or emotional appeals in crowdfunding message strategy: An empirical investigation of backers’ support decisions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47, 6 (2019), 1046–1063.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiao, S., Ho, Y.C., and Che, H. Building the momentum: Information disclosure and herding in online crowdfunding. Production and Operations Management, 30, 9 (2021), 3213–3230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiao, S., and Yue, Q. The role you play, the life you have: Donor retention in online charitable crowdfunding platform. Decision Support Systems, 140 (2021), 113427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, J.J., and Chau, M. Cheap talk? The impact of lender-borrower communication on peer-to-peer lending outcomes. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35, 1 (2018), 53–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zajonc, R.B. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 2 (1980), 151–175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, D., Lowry, P.B., Zhou, L., and Fu, X. The impact of individualism—collectivism, social presence, and group diversity on group decision making under majority influence. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23, 4 (2007), 53–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, K., Zhou, L., and Zhao, X. Multi-modal emotion expression and online charity crowdfunding success. Decision Support Systems, 163 (2022), 113842.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar