IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2407.09480.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using Artificial Intelligence to Unlock Crowdfunding Success for Small Businesses

Author

Listed:
  • Teng Ye
  • Jingnan Zheng
  • Junhui Jin
  • Jingyi Qiu
  • Wei Ai
  • Qiaozhu Mei

Abstract

While small businesses are increasingly turning to online crowdfunding platforms for essential funding, over 40% of these campaigns may fail to raise any money, especially those from low socio-economic areas. We utilize the latest advancements in AI technology to identify crucial factors that influence the success of crowdfunding campaigns and to improve their fundraising outcomes by strategically optimizing these factors. Our best-performing machine learning model accurately predicts the fundraising outcomes of 81.0% of campaigns, primarily based on their textual descriptions. Interpreting the machine learning model allows us to provide actionable suggestions on improving the textual description before launching a campaign. We demonstrate that by augmenting just three aspects of the narrative using a large language model, a campaign becomes more preferable to 83% human evaluators, and its likelihood of securing financial support increases by 11.9%. Our research uncovers the effective strategies for crafting descriptions for small business fundraising campaigns and opens up a new realm in integrating large language models into crowdfunding methodologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Teng Ye & Jingnan Zheng & Junhui Jin & Jingyi Qiu & Wei Ai & Qiaozhu Mei, 2024. "Using Artificial Intelligence to Unlock Crowdfunding Success for Small Businesses," Papers 2407.09480, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2407.09480
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2407.09480
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Duygan-Bump, Burcu & Levkov, Alexey & Montoriol-Garriga, Judit, 2015. "Financing constraints and unemployment: Evidence from the Great Recession," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 89-105.
    2. Athey, Susan & Karlan, Dean & Palikot, Emil & Yuan, Yuan, 2022. "Smiles in Profiles: Improving Fairness and Efficiency Using Estimates of User Preferences in Online Marketplaces," Research Papers 4071, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    3. Duan, Yang & Hsieh, Tien-Shih & Wang, Ray R. & Wang, Zhihong, 2020. "Entrepreneurs' facial trustworthiness, gender, and crowdfunding success," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    4. Kamatham, Sri Harsha & Pahwa, Parneet & Jiang, Juncai & Kumar, Nanda, 2021. "Effect of appeal content on fundraising success and donor behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 827-839.
    5. Menezes, C F & Hanson, D L, 1970. "On the Theory of Risk Aversion," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 11(3), pages 481-487, October.
    6. Hadar Gafni & Dan Marom & Alicia Robb & Orly Sade, 2021. "Gender Dynamics in Crowdfunding (Kickstarter): Evidence on Entrepreneurs, Backers, and Taste-Based Discrimination [Women on the verge of a breakthrough: networking among entrepreneurs in the United," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 235-274.
    7. John A. List & James J. Murphy & Michael K. Price & Alexander G. James, 2021. "An experimental test of fundraising appeals targeting donor and recipient benefits," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(10), pages 1339-1348, October.
    8. Mi (Jamie) Zhou & Baozhou Lu & Weiguo (Patrick) Fan & G. Alan Wang, 2018. "Project description and crowdfunding success: an exploratory study," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 259-274, April.
    9. Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2008. "Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: Evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1047-1060, June.
    10. Dean Karlan & John A. List, 2007. "Does Price Matter in Charitable Giving? Evidence from a Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1774-1793, December.
    11. Karlan, Dean & List, John A. & Shafir, Eldar, 2011. "Small matches and charitable giving: Evidence from a natural field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(5-6), pages 344-350, June.
    12. Anna Cororaton & Sagiri Kitao & Sergiu Laiu & Ayşegül Şahin, 2011. "Why small businesses were hit harder by the recent recession," Current Issues in Economics and Finance, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, vol. 17(July).
    13. Armin Falk, 2007. "Gift Exchange in the Field," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(5), pages 1501-1511, September.
    14. Sofia Bapna & Martin Ganco, 2021. "Gender Gaps in Equity Crowdfunding: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2679-2710, May.
    15. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2006. "Subsidizing Charitable Giving with Rebates or Matching: Further Laboratory Evidence," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(4), pages 794-807, April.
    16. Robert Fairlie & Frank M. Fossen & Reid Johnsen & Gentian Droboniku, 2023. "Were small businesses more likely to permanently close in the pandemic?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 1613-1629, April.
    17. Chen Yan & Li Xin & MacKie-Mason Jeffrey K, 2005. "Online Fund-Raising Mechanisms: A Field Experiment," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-39, December.
    18. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2006. "Subsidizing Charitable Giving with Rebates or Matching: Further Laboratory Evidence," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(4), pages 794-807, April.
    19. Igra, Mark & Kenworthy, Nora & Luchsinger, Cadence & Jung, Jin-Kyu, 2021. "Crowdfunding as a response to COVID-19: Increasing inequities at a time of crisis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    20. Ling Peng & Geng Cui & Ziru Bao & Shuman Liu, 2022. "Speaking the same language: the power of words in crowdfunding success and failure," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 311-323, June.
    21. Nora Kenworthy & Zhihang Dong & Anne Montgomery & Emily Fuller & Lauren Berliner, 2020. "A cross-sectional study of social inequities in medical crowdfunding campaigns in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-23, March.
    22. Peter R. Murphy & Evert Boonstra & Sander Nieuwenhuis, 2016. "Global gain modulation generates time-dependent urgency during perceptual choice in humans," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, December.
    23. Qianzhou Du & Jing Li & Yanqing Du & G. Alan Wang & Weiguo Fan, 2021. "Predicting crowdfunding project success based on backers' language preferences," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(12), pages 1558-1574, December.
    24. Susan Coleman & Alicia Robb, 2009. "A comparison of new firm financing by gender: evidence from the Kauffman Firm Survey data," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 397-411, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chandrayee Chatterjee & James C. Cox & Michael K. Price & Florian Rundhammer, 2020. "Competition Among Charities: Field Experimental Evidence from a State Income Tax Credit for Charitable Giving," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2020-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    2. John A. List & James J. Murphy & Michael K. Price & Alexander G. James, 2019. "Do Appeals to Donor Benefits Raise More Money than Appeals to Recipient Benefits? Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment with Pick.Click.Give," NBER Working Papers 26559, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Hannes Koppel & Günther G. Schulze, 2009. "On the Channels of Pro-Social Behavior Evidence from a natural field experiment," Jena Economics Research Papers 2009-102, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    4. Johannes Diederich & Catherine C. Eckel & Raphael Epperson & Timo Goeschl & Philip J. Grossman, 2022. "Subsidizing unit donations: matches, rebates, and discounts compared," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(2), pages 734-758, April.
    5. Jan Schmitz, 2021. "Is Charitable Giving a Zero-Sum Game? The Effect of Competition Between Charities on Giving Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6333-6349, October.
    6. Meer, Jonathan, 2017. "Does fundraising create new giving?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 82-93.
    7. Andreas Lange & Andrew Stocking, 2009. "Charitable Memberships, Volunteering, and Discounts: Evidence from a Large-Scale Online Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 14941, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Craig Landry & Andreas Lange & John List & Michael Price & Nicholas Rupp, 2011. "Is There a 'Hidden Cost of Control' in Naturally-Occurring Markets? Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00593, The Field Experiments Website.
    9. Craig E. Landry & Andreas Lange & John A. List & Michael K. Price & Nicholas G. Rupp, 2010. "Is a Donor in Hand Better Than Two in the Bush? Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 958-983, June.
    10. Huck, Steffen & Rasul, Imran, 2011. "Matched fundraising: Evidence from a natural field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(5-6), pages 351-362, June.
    11. Gee, Laura K. & Schreck, Michael J., 2018. "Do beliefs about peers matter for donation matching? Experiments in the field and laboratory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 282-297.
    12. Damgaard, Mette Trier & Gravert, Christina, 2017. "Now or never! The effect of deadlines on charitable giving: Evidence from two natural field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 78-87.
    13. Diederich, Johannes & Epperson, Raphael & Goeschl, Timo, 2021. "How to Design the Ask? Funding Units vs. Giving Money," Working Papers 0698, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    14. Owens, Mark F. & Rennhoff, Adam D. & Baum, Charles L., 2018. "Consumer demand for charitable purchases: Evidence from a field experiment on Girl Scout Cookie sales," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 47-63.
    15. Diederich, Johannes & Eckel, Catherine C. & Epperson, Raphael & Goeschl, Timo & Grossman, Philip J., 2019. "Subsidizing Quantity Donations: Matches, Rebates, and Discounts Compared," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203650, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. Laura Gee & Michael Schreck, 2016. "Do Beliefs About Peers Matter for Donation Matching? Experiments in the Field and Laboratory," Framed Field Experiments 00538, The Field Experiments Website.
    17. Drouvelis, Michalis & Marx, Benjamin M., 2018. "Prosociality spillovers of working with others," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 205-216.
    18. Gayle, Philip, 2024. "Do Nonprofits Engage in Excessive Fundraising?," MPRA Paper 120684, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Yalin Wang & Yaokuang Li & Juan Wu & Li Ling & Dan Long, 2023. "Does digitalization sufficiently empower female entrepreneurs? Evidence from their online gender identities and crowdfunding performance," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 325-348, June.
    20. Davis, Douglas D., 2006. "Rebate subsidies, matching subsidies and isolation effects," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 13-22, July.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2407.09480. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.