Mixed crowdsourcing has become the main organization model of domestic crowdsourcing platform. The existing research on the interpretation of winning performance mainly fails to pay attention to the persuasive effect on the decision-making of the contractees from the perspective of information receiving of the contractors and the credibility of the information source of the contractors. The data collected from EPWK website, the two round of data collection was carried out, including the industries engaged by the contractors, the ID of the contractor’s team, the profile of the contractor’s team, regional division, city level, total number of successful bids, integrity guarantee, contact authentication, ability level, professional identity, number of cases, number of members, type of the contractor’s team, and number of positive evaluations. Based on the information source credibility theory, this paper constructs a model of the factors influencing the winning bid performance of the contractors from three aspects of credibility, professionalism and attractiveness, and explores the moderating effect of positive evaluation on the above relationships. The results show that good faith guarantee, contact certification, competence level and professional status positively affect the winning bid performance of the contractors, and the reverse u-shaped relationship exists between the number of services and members displayed by the contractors and the winning bid performance.
The Influence of Source Credibility Theory on Bid-winning Performance, European Business & Management.
Vol. 7, No. 1,
2021, pp. 1-13.
Poetz, M. K., Schreier, M. (2012). The value of crowdsourcing: can users really compete with professionals in generating new productideas? Journal of product innovation management. 29 (2), 245-256.
Hu, Liping. (2010). A discussion on developing virtual reference service based on witkey-mode in academic library. Library Journal. 8 (1).
Bockstedt, J., Mishra, A., Druehl, C. (2011). Do Participation Strategy and Experience Impact the Likelihood of Winning in Unblind Innovation Contests?. Available at SSRN. 196, 12-44.
Lüttgens D., Pollok P., Antons D. (2014). Wisdom of the crowd and capabilities of a few: internal success factors of crowdsourcing for innovation. Journal of Business Economics. 84 (3), 339-374.
Zuchowski O., Posegga O., Schlagwein D. (2016). Internalcrowdsourcing: conceptual framework, structured review and research agenda. Journal of Information Technology. 31 (2), 166-184.
Lee, H. C. B., Ba, S., Li, X. (2018). Salience bias in crowdsourcing contests. Information Systems Research. 29 (2), 401-418.
Wang X., Khasraghi H. J., Schneider H. (2019). Towards an understanding of participants’ sustained participation in crowdsourcing contests. Information Systems Management. 1 (0), 1-14.
Ayaburi E. W., Lee J., Maasberg M. (2019). Understanding crowdsourcing contest fitness strategic decision factors and performance: an expectation-confirmation theory perspective. Information Systems Frontiers. 1 (0), 1-14.
Zheng, C., Lidh, Houwh. (2011). Taskdesign, motivation, and participation incrows sourcing contests. International Journal of Electronic Commerce. 1 (4), 57-88.
Bullinger, A. C., Neyer, A. K., Rass, M. (2010). Community-based innovation contests: where competition meets cooperation. Creativity & Innovation Management. 19 (3), 290-303.
Shan, Liu, Fanl. (2016). Exploring the trends, characteristic antecedents, and performance consequences of crowdsourcing project risks. International Journal of Project Management. 34 (8): 1625-1637.
Marinova, D. M. (2016). On the Use of Crowdsourcing Labor Markets in Research. Perspectives on Politics. 14 (2), 422-431.
Ghezzi, A., Gabelloni, D., Martini, A. (2018). Crowdsourcing: a review and suggestions for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews. 20 (2): 343-363.
Shao, B., Shi, L., Xu, B. (2012). Factors affecting participation of contractors in crowdsourcing: an empirical study from China. Electronic Markets. 22 (2), 73-82.
Gefen, D., Gefen, G., Carmel, E. (2016). How project description length and expected duration affect bidding and project success in crowdsourcing software development. Journal of Systemsand Software. 116 (1), 75-84.
Leimeister, J. M., Huber, M., Bretschneider, U. (2009). Leveragingcrowdsourcing: activation-supporting components for IT-based ideas competition. Journal of management information systems. 26 (1), 197-224.
Mahr, D., Rindfleisch, A., Slotegraaf, R. J. (2015). Enhancing crowdsourcing success: the role of creative and deliberate problem-solving styles. Customer Needs and Solutions. 2 (3), 209-221.
Jian, L., Yang, S., Ba, S. (2019). Managing the crowds: the effect of prize guarantees and in-process feedback on participation in crowdsourcing contests. MIS quarterly. 43 (1), 97-112.
Sun, Y., Fang, Y., Lim, K. H. (2012). Understanding sustained participation in transactional virtual communities. Decision Support Systems, 53 (1), 12-22.
Ye, H. J., Kankanhalli. (2017). Acontractors’participation in crowdsourcing platforms: examining the impacts of trust, and benefit and cost factors. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems. 26 (2), 101-117.
Martinez, M. G., Walton, B. (2014). The wisdom of crowds: the potential of online communities as a tool for data analysis. Technovation. 34 (4), 203-214.
Terwiesch, C., Xu, Y. (2008). Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problemsolving. Management science. 54 (9), 1529-1543.
Zheng, H., Li, D., Hou, W. (2011). Task design, motivation, and participation in crowdsourcing contests. International Journal of Electronic Commerce. 15 (4), 57-88.
Xiao, H., Xiaomin, G., Pengzhu, Z. (2018). Online labor service crowdsourcing analysis based on linear discriminant regression. Cognitive Systems Research. 52, 168-173.
Mo, J., Sarkar, S., Menon, S. (2018). Know When to Run: Recommendations in Crowdsourcing Contests. MIS Quarterly. 42 (3), 919-943.
Jiang, Z. Z., Huang, Y., Beil, D. R., The Role of Feedback in Dynamic Crowdsourcing Contests: A Structural Empirical Analysis. Social ence Electronic Publishing.
Boudreau, K. J., Lacetera, N., Lakhani, K. R. (2011). Incentives and problem uncertainty in innovation contests: An empirical analysis. Management science. 57 (5), 843-863.
Ye, H., Kankanhalli, A. (2017). Contractors' participation in crowdsourcing platforms: Examining the impacts of trust, and benefit and cost factors. Information Age. 26 (2), 101-117.
Archak, N. (2010). Money, glory and cheap talk: analyzing strategic behavior of contestants in simultaneous crowdsourcing contests on TopCoder. Com. Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web. 1 (1), 21-30.
Hovland, C., Janis, I., Kelley, H. (1954). Communication and persuasion. Psychological Studies of Opinion Change. American Sociological Review. 19 (3), 355.
Hovland, C., Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly. 15 (1), 635-650.
Lowry, P. B., Wilson, D. W., Haig, W. L. (2014). A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words: Source Credibility Theory Applied to Logo and Website Design for Heightened Credibility and Consumer Trust. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction. 30 (1-3), 63-93.
Cho, J., Kwon, K., Park, Y. (2009). Q-rater: a collaborative reputation system based on source credibility theory. Expert Systems with Applications. 36 (2), 3751-3760.
Robins, D., Holmes, J. (2008). Aesthetics and credibility in web site design. Information Processing & Management. 44 (1), 386-399.
Teven, J. (2008). An examination of perceived credibility of the 2008 Presidential Candidates: Relationships with Believability, Likeability, and Deceptiveness. Human Communications. 11 (1) 383-400.
Dholakia, R. R. (1987). Source credibility effects: a Test of Behavior Persistence. Advances in Consumer Research, 14, 426-430.
Johnson, T. J., Kaye, B. K. (2009). In blog we trust? Deciphering Credibility Of Components Of The Internet Among Politically Interested Internet Users. Computers in Human Behavior. 25 (1). 175-182.
Shimp. (2010). Integrated Marketing Communications In Advertising And Promotion Integrated Marketing Communications In Advertising And Promotion. 4 (3), 223-236.
Visentin, M., Pizzi, G. (2019). Pichierri, M., Fake news, real problems for brands: the impact of content truthfulness and source credibility on consumers' behavioral intentions toward the advertised brands. Journal of Interactive Marketing. 45 (1): 99-112.
Na, S., Kunkel, T., Doyle, J. (2020). Exploring athlete brand image development on social media: the role of signalling through source credibility. European Sport Management Quarterly. 20 (1), 88-108.
Jones, L. W., Sinclair, R. C., Courneya, K. S. (2003). The effects of source credibility and message framing on exercise intentions, behaviors, and attitudes: an integration of the elaboration likelihood model and prospect theory. Journal of applied social psychology. 33 (1), 179-196.
McGinnies, Elliott, and Charles, D., Ward. (1980). Better liked than right: trustworthiness and expertise as factors in credibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 6 (3), 467–72.
Ohanian, Roobina. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising. 19 (3), 39–52.
Ridings, C. M., Gefen, D., Arinze, B. (2002). Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities. The journal of strategic Information Systems. 11 (3-4). 271-295.
Patrick, P., Lüttgens, Dirk., Piller, F., T. (2018). Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and contractee status. Research Policy. 48 (1): 98-114.
Goldsmith, R. E., Lafferty, B. A., Newell, S. J. (2000). The impact of corporate credibility and celebrity credibility on consumer reaction to advertisements and brands. Journal of Advertising. 29 (3), 43–54.
Lafferty, B. A., Goldsmith, R. E., Newell, S. J. (2002). The dual credibility model: The influence of corporate and endorser credibility on attitudes and purchase intentions. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice. 10 (3), 1–11.
Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The effect of celebrity endorsers’ perceived credibility on product purchase intention: The case of Singaporeans. Journal of International Consumer. 16 (2), 55–74.
Wang, S. W., Kao, G. H. Y., Ngamsiriudom, W. (2017). Consumers’attitude of endorser credibility, brand and intention with respect to celebrity endorsement of the airline sector. Journal of Air Transport Management. 60 (1), 10–17.
Sun, Y., Wang, N., Yin, C. (2015). Understanding the relationships between motivators and effort in crowdsourcing marketplaces: A nonlinear analysis. International Journal of Information Management. 35 (3), 267-276.
Dellarocas, C. (2005). Reputation mechanism design in online trading environments with pure moral hazard. Information systems research. 16 (2), 209-230.
Taboubi, Sihem. (2019). Incentive mechanisms for price and advertising coordination in dynamic marketing channels. International Transactions in Operational Research. 26 (6), 2281-2304.
Barnes, S. A., Green, A. de, Hoyos, M. (2015). Crowdsourcing and work: individual factors and circumstances influencing employability. New Technology, Work and Employment. 30 (1), 16-31.
Gao, Q., Tian, Y., Tu, M. (2015). Exploring factors influencing Chinese user's perceived credibility of health and safety information on Weibo. Computers in Human Behavior. 45 (1), 21-31.
Berlo, D. K., Lemert, J. B., Mertz, R. J. (1969). Dimensions for evaluating the acceptability of message sources. Public opinion quarterly. 33 (4), 563-576.
Roberts, C. (2010). Correlations Among Variables in Message and Messenger Credibility Scales. American Behavioral Scientist. 54 (1), 43-56.
Narayanan, S., Balasubramanian, S., and Swaminathan, J. M. (2009). A Matter of Balance: Specialization, Task Variety, and Individual Learning in a Software Maintenance Environment, Management Science. 55 (11), 1861-1876.
Schilling, M. A., Vidal, P., Ployhart, R. E., Marangoni., A learning by doing something else: variation, relatedness, and the learning curve, Management Science. 49 (1), 39-56.
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and eliberate practice on the development of superior expert Performance. Journal of Workplace Learning. 20 (7), 560-560.
New York, NY., Wiley, Whitehead, J. L., JR. (1968). Factors of source credibility. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 54 (1), 59-63.
Ismagilova, E., Slade, E., Rana, N. P. (2020). The effect of characteristics of source credibility on consumer behaviour: A meta-analysis. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53 (1).
Purcell, A., Gero, J. (1992). Effects of examples on the results of a design activity. Knowledge-Based Systems, 5 (1), 82-91.
Chirico, F., Bau M. (2014). Is the family an ‘Asset’ or ‘Liability’ for firm performance? the moderating role of environmental dynamism. Journal of Small Business Management. 52 (2), 210-225.
Sui Y., Wang H., Kirkman, B. L. (2016). Understanding the curvilinear relationships between LMX differentiation and team coordination and performance. Personnel Psychology. 69 (3).
Birch, H. G., Rabinowitz, H. S. (1951). The negative effect of previous experience on productive thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41 (2), 121-125.
Ventre, I., Kolbe, D. (2020). The impact of perceived usefulness of online reviews, trust and perceived risk on online purchase intention in emerging markets: a mexican perspective. Journal of International Consumer Marketing. 1 (4), 1-13.
Van, Dijk. D., Kluger, A. N. (2004). Feedback sign effect on motivation: Is it moderated by regulatory focus? Applied Psychology. 53 (1), 113-135.
Sokolova, K., Kefi, H. (2020). Instagram and YouTube bloggers promote it, why should I buy? How credibility and parasocial interaction influence purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. 53 (1).
Zhang, K. Z. K., Zhao, S. J., Cheung, C. M. K., Lee, M. K. O. (2014). Examining the influence of online reviews on consumers' decision-making: a heuristic–systematic model. Decision Support Systems. 67 (C), 78-89.
Xu, X., Wang, X., Li, Y. (2017). Business intelligence in online customer textual reviews: Understanding consumer perceptions and influential factors. International Journal of information management. 37 (6), 673-683.