The Optimal Allocation of Prizes in Contests

By Benny Moldovanu, Aner Sela. 2001

922 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/afb8138aefa156eb175d8cdefc7f6c6db4b43e0b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Safety Research

Citations in the corpus

Incentives and Problem Uncertainty in Innovation Contests: An Empirical Analysis (2011, background): “These basic arguments have been shown to apply both in winner-takes-all payoffs as well as in cases in which payoffs are more continuous, with multiple prizes and payoffs that increase more continuously with performance (e.g., Konrad 2007, 2009; Moldovanu et al. 2007; Moldovanu and Sela 2001).”
Tournament Rewards and Risk Taking (2002, positive): “Recently, a corollary of the Informativeness Principle known as the relative performance evaluation (RPE) hypothesis has been extensively tested in the large empirical literature on CEO compensation (see Murphy, 1999, or Prendergast, 1998, for overviews). The idea behind the RPE hypothesis is that i”
Contest Design: An Experimental Investigation (2009, positive): “The most closely related work to ours is done by Müller and Schotter (2007) who analyze the influence of prizes in all-pay auction with heterogeneous agents following the theoretic work by Moldovanu and Sela (2001).”
Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving (2008, methodology): “We combine prior research from the  eld of contests and tournaments (e.g. Moldovanu and Sela 2001) with models of product development and search (e.g. Dahan and Mendelson 2001, Ter-wiesch and Loch 2004).”
Political Culture and Discrimination in Contests (2011, background): “3 Glazer and Hassin (1988), Moldovanu and Sela (2001) and Nti (2004) deal with the contest prize, Baye et al. (1993), Amegashie (2000) and Taylor (1995) focus on the set of contestants, Gradstein (1998), Gradstein and Konrad (1999) and Amegashie (2000) examine the structure of multi-stage contests,…”
Resource Allocation Contests: Experimental Evidence (2013, positive): “5 The main difference is that there are 𝑚 prizes, instead of one, and each 5 There exists substantial theoretical work on contests with multiple prizes (Berry, 1993; Clark and Riis, 1998; Moldovanu and Sela, 2001; Fu and Lu, 2009).”
A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments (2014, background): “They found that total effort 6 Freeman and Gelber (2010) conduct an experimental test of Moldovanu and Sela (2001) based on a real-effort experiment.”
An experimental study on tournament design (2003, background): “In Nalbantian and Schotter (1997), different collective compensation schemes are compared, among others a tournament with groups of players. It is confirmed that tournaments can provide much stronger incentives but also induce a higher variance of behaviour than other collective schemes. The study o”
Incentive effects of second prizes (2005, background): “Our results also complement those of Moldovanu and Sela (2001) who have analyzed the problem of second prizes in the case of an all-pay auction.”
Crowdsourcing and all-pay auctions (2009, background): “In [10], Moldovanu and Sela explore the design of contests in which multiple rewards are available to users.”
Contest architecture (2006, methodology): “By the results in Moldovanu and Sela [22], this is optimal for a contest designer having the goals studied here that faces contestants with linear cost functions.”
The optimal multi-stage contest (2012, background): “Next, we study 5This effect is consistent with the “winner-take-all” principle in Moldovanu and Sela (2001). how the contest organizer optimally chooses the sequence {Nl} L l=1 to maximize the total efforts E.”