Selling science 2.0: What scientific projects receive crowdfunding online?

Abstract

Crowdfunding has emerged as an additional source for financing research in recent years. The study at hand identifies and tests explanatory factors influencing the success of scientific crowdfunding projects by drawing on news value theory, the “reputation signaling” approach, and economic theories of online payment. A standardized content analysis of 371 projects on English- and German-language platforms reveals that each theory provides factors influencing crowdfunding success. It shows that projects presented on science-only crowdfunding platforms have a higher success rate. At the same time, projects are more likely to be successful if their presentation includes visualizations and humor, the lower their targeted funding is, the less personal data potential donors have to relinquish and the more interaction between researchers and donors is possible. This suggests that after donors decide to visit a scientific crowdfunding platform, factors unrelated to science matter more for subsequent funding decisions, raising questions about the potential and implications of crowdfunding science.

Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science

“…Even though they are pronounced in the political realm (Saurugger, 2010), “participatory discourses and techniques have been at the core of decision-making processes in a variety of sectors of society” (Bherer et al., 2016: 225), from social movements (Della Porta and Rucht, 2013) over companies and trade unions (Lee, 2014) to bureaucratic organizations (Nabatchi, 2010) and art (Bishop, 2012). A rise of participatory demands has also been described for science (Gregory and Miller, 1998), including the implementation of citizen participation in science-related decision-making (Einsiedel and Eastlick, 2000), public control of scientific work (Fähnrich et al., 2015; Ford, 2013), the crowd funding of science (Schäfer et al., 2018b), or citizen science (Füchslin et al., 2019).…”

Who wants to be a citizen scientist? Identifying the potential of citizen science and target segments in Switzerland

“…They can be watchdogs in post-publication peer review online, or on plagiarism Wikis (e.g., Fähnrich, Janssen Danyi, & Nothhaft, 2015). They can finance science via crowdfunding (e.g., Schäfer, Metag, Feustle, & Herzog, 2016). And they can participate in research by becoming citizen scientists.…”

Crowdfunding in higher education: evidence from UK Universities

“…Additionally, there is a concern that potential funders among the public may prefer less risky projects that are more likely to succeed or may not have the necessary knowledge to assess the quality and merit of projects for which funding is requested (Sturgis & Allum, 2004). Indeed, successfully crowdfunded research projects are typically hosted on science-only crowdfunding platforms and their proponents include non-sciencerelated content to "sell" their project, rather than providing complex scientific explanations (Schafer et al, 2018). This "marketing" of the project and the need for universities to engage in sourcing funding directly from society underscores the entrepreneurial dimension of engaging in crowdfunding, which is well attuned to the transformation of HEIs into entrepreneurial organizations in this age of academic capitalism (Jessop, 2017).…”