Mapping the Signaling Landscape in Crowdfunding: Insights From Profit and Non‐Profit Models

Crowdfunding campaigns rely heavily on signals to reduce information asymmetries, yet evidence regarding signaling effectiveness remains fragmented across crowdfunding models. This review examines how and why signaling effectiveness varies across crowdfunding contexts through a systematic narrative synthesis of 97 empirical studies identified within a 2015–2023 review window. The synthesis suggests that signaling effectiveness varies in patterned ways across the reviewed crowdfunding contexts. Rather than functioning as universally effective cues, signals are interpreted through distinct receiver decision problems associated with profit‐oriented and non‐profit‐oriented crowdfunding environments. The review develops a comparative signaling taxonomy that links crowdfunding context, signal portfolios, credibility mechanisms, receiver interpretation, and fundraising outcomes. The systematic narrative synthesis further suggests that signaling outcomes depend not only on signal characteristics but also on how heterogeneous receivers interpret coherent signal portfolios. In addition, credibility may be supported through multiple mechanisms, including costliness and verifiability, reputational exposure, transparency and accountability, third‐party validation, and portfolio consistency. By integrating fragmented evidence across crowdfunding models, the review advances a contextualized understanding of signaling effectiveness and extends signaling theory to heterogeneous digital fundraising environments.