Journal of Korea Multimedia Society (한국멀티미디어학회논문지)

Korea Multimedia Society (한국멀티미디어학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Predicting Success of Crowdfunding Campaigns using Multimedia and Linguistic Features

멀티미디어 및 언어적 특성을 활용한 크라우드펀딩 캠페인의 성공 여부 예측

  • Received : 2018.01.12
  • Accepted : 2018.02.07
  • Published : 2018.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Crowdfunding has seen an enormous rise, becoming a new alternative funding source for emerging startup companies in recent years. Despite the huge success of crowdfunding, it has been reported that only around 40% of crowdfunding campaigns successfully raise the desired goal amount. The purpose of this study is to investigate key factors influencing successful fundraising on crowdfunding platforms. To this end, we mainly focus on contents of project campaigns, particularly their linguistic cues as well as multiple features extracted from project information and multimedia contents. We reveal which of these features are useful for predicting success of crowdfunding campaigns, and then build a predictive model based on those selected features. Our experimental results demonstrate that the built model predicts the success or failure of a crowdfunding campaign with 86.15% accuracy.

Keywords

References

  1. Massolution, 2015CF Crowdfunding Industry Report, http://reports.crowdsourcing.org, (accessed Jun., 1, 2018).
  2. D.J. Cumming, G. Leboeuf, and A. Schwienbacher, Crowdfunding Models: Keep-it-all vs. All-or-nothing, Call for Papers : Paris December 2014 Finance Meeting Eurofidaiaffi Paper, 2014.
  3. The Funding Pledged to Kickstarter Projects, https://www.statista.com/statistics/310218/total-kickstarter-funding/, (accessed Jun., 1, 2018).
  4. V. Etter, M. Grossglauser, and P. Thiran, "Launch Hard or Go Home!: Predicting the Success of Kickstarter Campaigns," Proceeding of the Association for Computing Machinery Conference on Online Social Networks, pp. 177-182, 2013.
  5. E. Mollick, "The Dynamics of Crowdfunding: An Exploratory Study," Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 1-16, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.06.005
  6. M.D. Greenberg and M.G. Elizabeth, "Learning to Fail: Experiencing Public Failure Online through Crowdfunding," Proceeding of the Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on Computer-human Interaction Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 581-590, 2014.
  7. M.D. Greenberg, B. Pardo, K. Hariharan, and E. Gerber, "Crowdfunding Support Tools: Predicting Success and Failure," Proceeding of the Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on Computer-human Interaction Conference on Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1815-1820, 2013.
  8. Kickstarter Success Prediction Service, http://sidekick.epfl.ch/, (accessed Jun., 1, 2018).
  9. K. Chen, B. Jones, I. Kim, and B. Schlamp, KickPredict: Predicting Kickstarter Success, Technical Report, California Institute of Technology, 2013.
  10. N. Desai, R. Gupta, and K. Truong, Plead or Pitch? The Role of Language in Kickstarter Project Success, Technical Report, Stanford University, 2015.
  11. J.W. Pennebaker, R.L. Boyd, K. Jordan, and K. Blackburn, The Development and Psychometric Properties of LIWC, Technical Report https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/31333, (accessed Jun, 1, 2018).
  12. J.W. Pennebaker, M.E. Francis, and R.J. Booth, “Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count: LIWC 2001,” Journal of Mahway: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Vol. 71, No. 2001, pp. 2001, 2001.
  13. C.D. Manning, M. Surdeanu, J. Bauer, J.R. Finkel, S. Bethard, and D. McClosky, "The Stanford Corenlp Natural Language Processing Toolkit," Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, pp. 55-60, 2014.
  14. S. Dey, B. Duff, K. Karahalios, and W.T. Fu, "The Art and Science of Persuasion: Not All Crowdfunding Campaign Videos Are The Same," Proceeding of the Association for Computing Machinery Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, pp. 755-769, 2017.
  15. E. Loper and S. Bird, "NLTK: The Natural Language Toolkit," Proceeding of the Association for Computational Linguistics-02 Workshop on Effective Tools and Methodologies for Teaching Natural Language Processing and Computational Linguistics-volume 1, pp. 63-70, 2002.
  16. R.J. Senter and E.A. Smith, Automated Readability Index, Technical Report, University of Cincinnati, 1967.
  17. M. Coleman and T.L. Liau, “A Computer Readability Formula Designed for Machine Scoring,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 283, 1975. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076540
  18. R. Gunning, The Technique of Clear Writing, McGraw-Hill Publisher, New York, 1952.
  19. R. Flesch, "A New Readability Yardstick," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 221-233, 1948. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057532
  20. N. Williams and S. Zander, Evaluating Machine Learning Algorithms for Automated Network Application Identification, Technical Report, Swinburne University of Technology, Centre for Advanced Internet Architectures, 2006.
  21. H.C. Kim, K.C. Claffy, M. Fomenkov, D. Barman, M. Faloutsos, and K.Y. Lee, "Internet Traffic Classification Demystified: Myths, Caveats, and the Best Practices," Proceeding of the Association for Computing Machinery International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, pp. 11, 2008.
  22. M. Hall, E. Frank, G. Holmes, B. Pfahringer, P. Reutemann, and I.H. Witten, “The WEKA Data Mining Software: an Update,” Journal of The Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining Explorations Newsletter, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 10-18, 2009.
  23. H. Lee, "Use of the Moving Average of the Current Weather Data for the Solar Power Generation Amount Prediction," Journal of Korea Multimedia Society, Vol. 19, No. 8, pp. 1530-1537, 2016. https://doi.org/10.9717/kmms.2016.19.8.1530