我没赢!众包被忽视的缺点?

IF 6.8 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Interactive Marketing Pub Date : 2023-09-11 DOI:10.1177/10949968231184417
Tatiana Karpukhina, Martin Schreier, Chris Janiszewski, Hidehiko Nishikawa
{"title":"我没赢!众包被忽视的缺点?","authors":"Tatiana Karpukhina, Martin Schreier, Chris Janiszewski, Hidehiko Nishikawa","doi":"10.1177/10949968231184417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research identifies a surprising downside to using crowdsourcing to generate new product ideas: participants who do not win an idea generation contest temporarily disengage from the contest-hosting brand. When people lose a crowdsourcing contest, the experience of losing negatively affects the participants’ word-of-mouth and short-term purchase behaviors. Reframing the contest as a community activity (e.g., “Join the crowd and help us find a name for our new restaurant”) rather than a competition (e.g., “Compete with the crowd to be the one who names our new restaurant”) is found to positively affect a losing customer's subsequent engagement with the contest-hosting brand. Community framing shifts attention away from losing the contest (i.e., it reduces negative affect) and toward collectively creating a superior outcome (i.e., it increases one's perceived contribution), without changing the nature of the contest itself (i.e., participants continue to submit ideas). Community framing positively affects subsequent participant engagement, but it does not influence the effort the participant invests in the contest or the quality of the idea the participant submits. The evidence consists of lab experiments, field experiments, and a large-scale field study that measured actual purchase behavior.","PeriodicalId":48260,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Marketing","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"I Didn’t Win! An Overlooked Downside of Crowdsourcing?\",\"authors\":\"Tatiana Karpukhina, Martin Schreier, Chris Janiszewski, Hidehiko Nishikawa\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10949968231184417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research identifies a surprising downside to using crowdsourcing to generate new product ideas: participants who do not win an idea generation contest temporarily disengage from the contest-hosting brand. When people lose a crowdsourcing contest, the experience of losing negatively affects the participants’ word-of-mouth and short-term purchase behaviors. Reframing the contest as a community activity (e.g., “Join the crowd and help us find a name for our new restaurant”) rather than a competition (e.g., “Compete with the crowd to be the one who names our new restaurant”) is found to positively affect a losing customer's subsequent engagement with the contest-hosting brand. Community framing shifts attention away from losing the contest (i.e., it reduces negative affect) and toward collectively creating a superior outcome (i.e., it increases one's perceived contribution), without changing the nature of the contest itself (i.e., participants continue to submit ideas). Community framing positively affects subsequent participant engagement, but it does not influence the effort the participant invests in the contest or the quality of the idea the participant submits. The evidence consists of lab experiments, field experiments, and a large-scale field study that measured actual purchase behavior.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48260,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interactive Marketing\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Interactive Marketing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10949968231184417\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interactive Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10949968231184417","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项研究发现了使用众包来产生新产品创意的一个令人惊讶的缺点:没有赢得创意竞赛的参与者暂时脱离了主办竞赛的品牌。当人们输掉一场众包竞赛时,失败的经历会对参与者的口碑和短期购买行为产生负面影响。将比赛重新定义为社区活动(例如,“加入人群,帮助我们为新餐厅命名”)而不是竞争(例如,“与人群竞争,成为为我们的新餐厅命名的人”),可以积极影响失去的客户随后与比赛主办品牌的互动。社区框架将注意力从输掉比赛(即减少负面影响)转移到集体创造更好的结果(即增加一个人的感知贡献),而不改变比赛本身的性质(即参与者继续提交想法)。社区框架积极影响随后的参与者参与,但它不影响参与者在比赛中投入的努力或参与者提交的想法的质量。证据包括实验室实验,现场实验,以及测量实际购买行为的大规模现场研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
I Didn’t Win! An Overlooked Downside of Crowdsourcing?
This research identifies a surprising downside to using crowdsourcing to generate new product ideas: participants who do not win an idea generation contest temporarily disengage from the contest-hosting brand. When people lose a crowdsourcing contest, the experience of losing negatively affects the participants’ word-of-mouth and short-term purchase behaviors. Reframing the contest as a community activity (e.g., “Join the crowd and help us find a name for our new restaurant”) rather than a competition (e.g., “Compete with the crowd to be the one who names our new restaurant”) is found to positively affect a losing customer's subsequent engagement with the contest-hosting brand. Community framing shifts attention away from losing the contest (i.e., it reduces negative affect) and toward collectively creating a superior outcome (i.e., it increases one's perceived contribution), without changing the nature of the contest itself (i.e., participants continue to submit ideas). Community framing positively affects subsequent participant engagement, but it does not influence the effort the participant invests in the contest or the quality of the idea the participant submits. The evidence consists of lab experiments, field experiments, and a large-scale field study that measured actual purchase behavior.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interactive Marketing aims to explore and discuss issues in the dynamic field of interactive marketing, encompassing both online and offline topics related to analyzing, targeting, and serving individual customers. The journal seeks to publish innovative, high-quality research that presents original results, methodologies, theories, and applications in interactive marketing. Manuscripts should address current or emerging managerial challenges and have the potential to influence both practice and theory in the field. The journal welcomes conceptually rigorous approaches of any type and does not favor or exclude specific methodologies.
期刊最新文献
When Post Hoc Explanation Knocks: Consumer Responses to Explainable AI Recommendations The Effects of Comparative Reviews on Product Sales Examining the Impact of Sponsored Search Results on Choice: An Anchoring Perspective The Power of AI-Generated Voices: How Digital Vocal Tract Length Shapes Product Congruency and Ad Performance Acknowledgments
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1