Abstract

In crowdfunding, disclosing campaign details and progress has been unanimously considered beneficial to fundraising because it can resolve information asymmetry and improve operational transparency. However, does this mean that fundraisers should keep posting updates regardless? In this study, we aim to understand the implication of the frequency and content of updates on fundraising in the context of medical crowdfunding. We deploy various Natural Language Processing models to analyze the type, volume, and novelty of information disclosed in updates and how funders perceive them. Our results delineate an inverted U-shaped relationship between update frequency and donation amount, contingent on content type. Specifically, medical-related updates can resolve concerns and foster positive impressions among funders, which improves fundraising. However, as the update frequency increases, further posts may contribute to cognitive overload, attenuating the effect. In contrast, non-medical updates are associated with fewer donations, as this type of update tends to contain redundant information and is negatively received by funders. This study contributes to crowdfunding literature by uncovering the unintended consequences of updates on fundraising due to reduced novelty and information overload. Our results suggest that theorizing the role of updates in medical crowdfunding needs to account for the two-sided nature of information disclosure. In particular, posting novel, issue-relevant information can initially reduce uncertainty and stimulate trust, positively influencing funding outcomes. However, overly frequent updates may likely include excessive details or repetitive content, adversely impacting fundraising.

DOI

10.17705/1jais.00939

Download

Share

COinS