While investors are usually well-informed audience, and their investments in to established markets are based on due diligence and by considering several economic indicators. Organizations that operate in established markets have a history of existence that signals their future performance. Many accreditation agencies and governmental bodies that overview and monitor the performance of the organization provide additional means to make well-informed investment decisions. However, on the other hand, consider the context of crowdfunding where new ventures that usually have no operating history seek funding for their prototypical products. The higher levels of uncertainty and chaos among existing crowd about the defaults and frauds, make it even more uncertain for the investors to invest in to crowdfunding projects. Off-course, there are many ways (e.g., rewards) that ventures use to gauge their reputation in the eyes of their audience. However, not all investors are convinced simply on rewards to make their investment decisions. They would reside on due diligence of the project's white paper and team as a cue to strengthen his cognitive poll. The decision may sound logical sometimes while may not be so logical at other times. The investors may involve in analogical comparisons while sometimes could simple make logical deductions. However, this stretch whether to make logical deduction or to engage in analogical classification is unclear. Therefore, I am trying to understand under what circumstances investors resort to analogical classifications as opposed to logical deductions?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Philosophy Of Science
- Reasoning