ArticleElectronic markets2022
Exploring engagement, well-being, and welfare on engagement platforms: Insight into the personal service sector from the DACH region.
Article in Electronic markets, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Engagement platforms (EPs) are an essential technology to enable co-creation and service innovation. Therefore, the design and governance of these platforms are receiving increasing attention in research. In this study, we aim to identify which activities and mechanisms foster engagement and which governance mechanisms are implemented to avoid harm on EPs. To this end, we conducted expert interviews with founders, CEOs, and managers of 14 personal and household-related service platform companies from the DACH region (Germany(D), Austria(A), Switzerland(CH)), to gain insights into their activities and mechanisms for creating and maintaining successful EPs. We found eight mechanisms, e.g., moderation of content, limitations of entry and certification, employed by personal EPs (PEPs) as self-regulatory mechanisms to avoid misconduct and negative experiences of actors. The identified governance mechanisms may guide the design and governing of PEPs by providing tangible examples to foster actor engagement while considering externalities on a societal and individual level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.