Post by arfanho7 on Feb 24, 2024 6:09:56 GMT -5
On the other hand you could imagine that experts aren t always good at keeping in touch with where consumers want to go. When Experts And Crowds Collide To better understand the gaps and overlaps between crowds and experts Nanda and co author Ethan Mollick of the University of Pennsylvania s Wharton School began their study with a full set of applications for theater projects from Kickstarter and stripped them of their outcome information.
They then distributed a set of three project successes and three failures to a group of individuals that had previously judged for organizations like the NEA and other funding bodies. The idea was quite simple to render the projects the way the crowd saw them on Kickstarter without outcome information and Egypt WhatsApp Number List have the judges look at them and judge them on things like artistic merit feasibility furthering cultural dialogue and some sense of commercial viability Nanda says. There were two broad sets of results. The first was a positive and statistically significant correlation between the scores judges assigned and the outcomes of the crowd suggesting that on average the two groups saw projects similarly based on the above criteria.
The second set of findings was on divergent projects which Nanda and Mollick were especially interested in. What did the crowd like that the experts did not and vice versa First it s important to consider that there s a bit of an art to raising money from the crowd Nanda says. Sometimes the judges liked projects for which the artists hadn t quite figured that part out. That said most of the disagreements were on projects that the crowd liked but that the judges would potentially have given less money to or not have funded at all.
They then distributed a set of three project successes and three failures to a group of individuals that had previously judged for organizations like the NEA and other funding bodies. The idea was quite simple to render the projects the way the crowd saw them on Kickstarter without outcome information and Egypt WhatsApp Number List have the judges look at them and judge them on things like artistic merit feasibility furthering cultural dialogue and some sense of commercial viability Nanda says. There were two broad sets of results. The first was a positive and statistically significant correlation between the scores judges assigned and the outcomes of the crowd suggesting that on average the two groups saw projects similarly based on the above criteria.
The second set of findings was on divergent projects which Nanda and Mollick were especially interested in. What did the crowd like that the experts did not and vice versa First it s important to consider that there s a bit of an art to raising money from the crowd Nanda says. Sometimes the judges liked projects for which the artists hadn t quite figured that part out. That said most of the disagreements were on projects that the crowd liked but that the judges would potentially have given less money to or not have funded at all.