1. This article examines how different types of feedback from peers and sponsors in online innovation contests (OIC) influence user participation and success.
2. The study finds that receiving sponsor static feedback in users’ first submission is positively associated with their continued participation in OIC, and has a stronger effect than peer dynamic feedback.
3. The goal of the study is to understand how the timing, source, and form of feedback shape user continuous participation and success in OIC.
The article “Feedback Types and Users’ Behavior in Online Innovation Contests: Evidence of Two Underlying Mechanisms” provides an interesting insight into the impact of different types of feedback on user behavior in online innovation contests (OIC). The authors present a literature review which shows that there is still limited understanding about the effects of diverse types of feedback on user participation, especially continued participation, and success in OIC. The authors then conduct a study to examine why and how different types of feedback influence users’ behavior in OIC, as well as the underlying mechanisms behind such influences.
The article is generally reliable and trustworthy due to its comprehensive literature review which provides evidence for its claims. Furthermore, the authors provide detailed explanations for their findings which are supported by evidence from their research. Additionally, they discuss potential implications for future research which further adds to the trustworthiness of the article.
However, there are some points that could be improved upon. For example, while the authors discuss potential implications for future research, they do not provide any suggestions or recommendations for practitioners who may be interested in using OICs to fuel innovation or improve customer experience. Additionally, while they discuss two underlying mechanisms (uncertainty reduction mechanism and learning mechanism), they do not explore other possible mechanisms that may also be at play when it comes to user behavior in OICs. Finally, while they discuss potential biases related to their data collection methods (e.g., self-selection bias), they do not provide any solutions or strategies for mitigating these biases or ensuring more accurate results from their research.