Tapping the crowds for research funding (original) (raw)

Selling science 2.0: What scientific projects receive crowdfunding online?

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.

To crowdfund research, scientists must build an audience for their work

As rates of traditional sources of scientific funding decline, scientists have become increasingly interested in crowdfunding as a means of bringing in new money for research. In fields where crowdfunding has become a major venue for fundraising such as the arts and technology, building an audience for one's work is key for successful crowdfunding. For science, to what extent does audience building, via engagement and outreach, increase a scientist's abilities to bring in money via crowdfunding? Here we report on an analysis of the #SciFund Challenge, a crowdfunding experiment in which 159 scientists attempted to crowdfund their research. Using data gathered from a survey of participants, internet metrics, and logs of project donations, we find that public engagement is the key to crowdfunding success. Building an audience or “fanbase” and actively engaging with that audience as well as seeking to broaden the reach of one's audience indirectly increases levels of funding. Audience size and effort interact to bring in more people to view a scientist's project proposal, leading to funding. We discuss how projects capable of raising levels of funds commensurate with traditional funding agencies will need to incorporate direct involvement of the public with science. We suggest that if scientists and research institutions wish to tap this new source of funds, they will need to encourage and reward activities that allow scientists to engage with the public.

Research my world: crowdfunding research pilot project evaluation

2013

V!Jtth ln De-.ak lfl Th~ Pni:iD~i:t wci5 spoMaMd a• t a SMlor ~Mutb.I~ L~v~l t>y th1 e< DVC-R Prat 1£~ ~he.lm1~r, and Gary H ~yimn firom Dl?il kln Rn2ar1 rh CommiUici.a L Ad1cfltlona l sup part was prov l1 g-OJ th:roughauttJh2 1 pi ro]ect by Chris fihompsol\ Warwlck H.adfiJeJdl , i::!yan i:layl>aulda d Marrus B1 olgeir. Staff firom De:ak lns Ma ' kllrti ng, .Ad' !J.a llOM"IMt a 11d Melfla ~12.l.atLans are.as wete' brleftOOl 1 on th~ j)rdj2,i:t pr lia:r to la undt. ~ p rirtj2r'.t ~mpl ayl?d an adm lnL~ratlVl!. as.sl~ nt .at a:2

Exploring Novel Funding Strategies for Innovative Medical Research: The HORAO Crowdfunding Campaign

Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2020

Background: The rise of the internet and social media has boosted online crowdfunding as a novel strategy to raise funds for kick-starting projects, but it is rarely used in science. Objective: We report on an online crowdfunding campaign launched in the context of the neuroscience project HORAO. The aim of HORAO was to develop a noninvasive real-time method to visualize neuronal fiber tracts during brain surgery in order to better delineate tumors and to identify crucial cerebral landmarks. The revenue from the crowdfunding campaign was to be used to sponsor a crowdsourcing campaign for the HORAO project. Methods: We ran a 7-week reward-based crowdfunding campaign on a national crowdfunding platform, offering optional material and experiential rewards in return for a contribution toward raising our target of Swiss francs (CHF) 50,000 in financial support (roughly equivalent to US $50,000 at the time of the campaign). We used various owned media (websites and social media), as well as earned media (press releases and news articles) to raise awareness about our project. Results: The production of an explanatory video took 60 hours, and 31 posts were published on social media (Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter). The campaign raised a total of CHF 69,109. Approximately half of all donations came from donors who forwent a reward (CHF 28,786, 48.74%); the other half came from donors who chose experiential and material rewards in similar proportions (CHF 14,958, 25.33% and CHF 15,315.69, 25.93%, respectively). Of those with an identifiable relationship to the crowdfunding team, patients and their relatives contributed the largest sum (CHF 17,820, 30.17%), followed by friends and family (CHF 9288, 15.73%) and work colleagues (CHF 6028, 10.21%), while 43.89% of funds came from donors who were either anonymous or had an unknown relationship to the crowdfunding team. Patients and their relatives made the largest donations, with a median value of CHF 200 (IQR 90). Conclusions: Crowdfunding proved to be a successful strategy to fund a neuroscience project and to raise awareness of a specific clinical problem. Focusing on potential donors with a personal interest in the issue, such as patients and their relatives in our project, is likely to increase funding success. Compared with traditional grant applications, new skills are needed to explain medical challenges to the crowd through video messages and social media.

Science created by crowds: a case study of science crowdfunding in Japan

Journal of Science Communication, 2018

Science crowdfunding" is a research funding system in which members of the public make small financial contributions towards a research project via the Internet. We compared the more common research process involving public research funding with science crowdfunding. In the former, academic-peer communities review the research carried out whereas the Crowd Community, an aggregation of backers, carries out this function in the latter. In this paper, we propose that science crowdfunding can be successfully used to generate "crowd-supported science" by means of this Crowd Community.

Over- And Under-Funding: Crowdfunding Concerns of the Parties Involved

Depaul Business and Commercial Law Journal, 2018

I. INTRODUCTION Financial collaboration for new business ventures or the expansion of existing businesses utilizing the internet and social media is expanding. One area of growth is in the area of crowdfunding. Crowdfunding or crowdsourcing is known as collaborative funding using the internet to attract many investors to a new business venture. 1 As of February 12, 2017, "[o]n average 416 new projects each day" 2 and 456,875 projects are currently tracked. 3 Crowdfunding platforms can be a great way for entrepreneurs to fund new ventures or projects. Funding for the project can be obtained utilizing crowdfunding platforms when traditional funding choices may not be available to the artist, entrepreneur, or small business owner. 4 Although there are many types of crowdfunding, this research will focus on crowdfunding utilizing a platform where rewards or thank you gifts are provided to those who invest in a campaign utilizing one of several popular platforms for such campaigns, sometimes known as patronage plus ex ante crowding 5 or rewards-based crowdfunding. 6 Entrepreneurs pitch their products on a fundraising platform looking for financial support. 7 Support is given when the like-minded contributor provides