Close, But No Cigar: The Bimodal Rewards to Prize-Seeking

Gabriel Rossman, Oliver Schilke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article examines the economic effects of prizes with implications for the diversity of market positions, especially in cultural fields. Many prizes have three notable features that together yield an emergent reward structure: (1) consumers treat prizes as judgment devices when making purchase decisions, (2) prizes introduce sharp discontinuities between winners and also-rans, and (3) appealing to prize juries requires costly sacrifices of mass audience appeal. When all three conditions obtain, winning a prize is valuable, but seeking it is costly, so trying and failing yields the worst outcome-a logic we characterize as a Tullock lottery. We test the model with analyses of Oscar nominations and Hollywood films from 1985 through 2009. We create an innovative measure of prize-seeking, or "Oscar appeal," on the basis of similarity to recent nominees in terms of such things as genre, plot keywords, and release date. We then show that Oscar appeal has no effect on profitability. However, this zero-order relationship conceals that returns to strong Oscar appeals are bimodal, with super-normal returns for nominees and large losses for snubs. We then argue that the effect of judgment devices on fields depends on how they structure and refract information.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)86-108
Number of pages23
JournalAmerican Sociological Review
Volume79
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

reward
appeal
market position
profitability
purchase
genre
economics

Keywords

  • culture
  • film
  • judgment device
  • market information
  • prizes
  • social cognition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Close, But No Cigar : The Bimodal Rewards to Prize-Seeking. / Rossman, Gabriel; Schilke, Oliver.

In: American Sociological Review, Vol. 79, No. 1, 02.2014, p. 86-108.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{bff5a6c83ea54b9988e1cf3b68d8c786,
title = "Close, But No Cigar: The Bimodal Rewards to Prize-Seeking",
abstract = "This article examines the economic effects of prizes with implications for the diversity of market positions, especially in cultural fields. Many prizes have three notable features that together yield an emergent reward structure: (1) consumers treat prizes as judgment devices when making purchase decisions, (2) prizes introduce sharp discontinuities between winners and also-rans, and (3) appealing to prize juries requires costly sacrifices of mass audience appeal. When all three conditions obtain, winning a prize is valuable, but seeking it is costly, so trying and failing yields the worst outcome-a logic we characterize as a Tullock lottery. We test the model with analyses of Oscar nominations and Hollywood films from 1985 through 2009. We create an innovative measure of prize-seeking, or {"}Oscar appeal,{"} on the basis of similarity to recent nominees in terms of such things as genre, plot keywords, and release date. We then show that Oscar appeal has no effect on profitability. However, this zero-order relationship conceals that returns to strong Oscar appeals are bimodal, with super-normal returns for nominees and large losses for snubs. We then argue that the effect of judgment devices on fields depends on how they structure and refract information.",
keywords = "culture, film, judgment device, market information, prizes, social cognition",
author = "Gabriel Rossman and Oliver Schilke",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1177/0003122413516342",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "79",
pages = "86--108",
journal = "American Sociological Review",
issn = "0003-1224",
publisher = "American Sociological Association",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Close, But No Cigar

T2 - The Bimodal Rewards to Prize-Seeking

AU - Rossman, Gabriel

AU - Schilke, Oliver

PY - 2014/2

Y1 - 2014/2

N2 - This article examines the economic effects of prizes with implications for the diversity of market positions, especially in cultural fields. Many prizes have three notable features that together yield an emergent reward structure: (1) consumers treat prizes as judgment devices when making purchase decisions, (2) prizes introduce sharp discontinuities between winners and also-rans, and (3) appealing to prize juries requires costly sacrifices of mass audience appeal. When all three conditions obtain, winning a prize is valuable, but seeking it is costly, so trying and failing yields the worst outcome-a logic we characterize as a Tullock lottery. We test the model with analyses of Oscar nominations and Hollywood films from 1985 through 2009. We create an innovative measure of prize-seeking, or "Oscar appeal," on the basis of similarity to recent nominees in terms of such things as genre, plot keywords, and release date. We then show that Oscar appeal has no effect on profitability. However, this zero-order relationship conceals that returns to strong Oscar appeals are bimodal, with super-normal returns for nominees and large losses for snubs. We then argue that the effect of judgment devices on fields depends on how they structure and refract information.

AB - This article examines the economic effects of prizes with implications for the diversity of market positions, especially in cultural fields. Many prizes have three notable features that together yield an emergent reward structure: (1) consumers treat prizes as judgment devices when making purchase decisions, (2) prizes introduce sharp discontinuities between winners and also-rans, and (3) appealing to prize juries requires costly sacrifices of mass audience appeal. When all three conditions obtain, winning a prize is valuable, but seeking it is costly, so trying and failing yields the worst outcome-a logic we characterize as a Tullock lottery. We test the model with analyses of Oscar nominations and Hollywood films from 1985 through 2009. We create an innovative measure of prize-seeking, or "Oscar appeal," on the basis of similarity to recent nominees in terms of such things as genre, plot keywords, and release date. We then show that Oscar appeal has no effect on profitability. However, this zero-order relationship conceals that returns to strong Oscar appeals are bimodal, with super-normal returns for nominees and large losses for snubs. We then argue that the effect of judgment devices on fields depends on how they structure and refract information.

KW - culture

KW - film

KW - judgment device

KW - market information

KW - prizes

KW - social cognition

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84893415596&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84893415596&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0003122413516342

DO - 10.1177/0003122413516342

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84893415596

VL - 79

SP - 86

EP - 108

JO - American Sociological Review

JF - American Sociological Review

SN - 0003-1224

IS - 1

ER -