Organizations that depend on voluntary contributions face unique managerial challenges. In this project, we examine whether emphasizing the salience of project output (i.e., project outcome) or project input (i.e., labor costs) affect the quantity and quality of contributions using a randomized field experiment on the world's largest crowd science platform. We manipulate whether participants receive information that emphasizes their contribution to the eventual outcome of a task or information that emphasizes their contribution to the labor required for a task. We find that increasing the salience of both output and input value decreases voluntary participation but increases the contribution quality. Our findings are consistent with information improving the match quality between the task and the volunteer. We complement our field experiment with a survey experiment and find evidence that individuals who select out of volunteering in response to the task information provided substitute by donating money from wage work. We discuss implications for organizations employing voluntary labor.
Research as Leisure: Experimental Evidence on Voluntary Contributions to Science
Policy implications
When communicating with contributors to a crowd science platform, emphasising their contribution to the outcome of a task or the labour required by a task decreases voluntary participation but increases the quality of contributions.
Reference
Lyons, E., Zhang, L. (forthcoming). 'Research as Leisure: Experimental Evidence on Voluntary Contributions to Science'. Working paper.