Natives in a Strange Land: The Relationship between Entrepreneurial Cognition and Biculturalism among Native Americans
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT This article examines the effect of culture on cognition in Native Americans. Traditional concepts of culture as linear, pervasive, and exclusive in a society are modified to reflect recent research in social cognition that indicates culture is much more fragmented and complex than previously believed. This new view of culture acquisition explains how people who embrace two cultures (bicultural) decide to respond to environmental cues concerning new venture creation. INTRODUCTION While there has been an in the number of Native Americans starting businesses, the group generally lags behind other minorities in the United States in important economic statistics. For example, Native American median household income is lower than all other minority groups except for African-Americans. The percentage of Native American households below the poverty level is the highest of all minority groups (U.S. Census Bureau, 2004-2005). Entrepreneurial activity creates new jobs and is an indicator of economic prosperity (Dana, 1995). Without entrepreneurship, a society cannot sustain economic development. Entrepreneurial activity is associated with increase in GDP, societal wealth, and quality of life (Morris, 2001, p. v). Empirical work confirms the relationship between activity and overall economic well-being. For example, Anderson (2002) found that activity among Aboriginal people in Canada increased the tribe's median household income and reduced unemployment. Van Praag and Versloot (2007) reviewed recent research on the value of entrepreneurship and reported that a number of studies indicated that activity added to the employment in the region in which the activity took place. Because of the relationship between activity and economic progress, the lack of activity among Native Americans has been the focus of a stream of research directed at examining cultural differences between Native Americans and the dominant white culture in the United States (Enz, Dollinger, & Daily, 1990; Hayton, George, & Zahra, 2002). Although this area of research contributes to our understanding of Native Americans and entrepreneurship, recent developments in entrepreneurship research, specifically the concept of entrepreneurial cognition, suggest it is time to revisit previous assumptions about Native American entrepreneurship and the relationship between culture and activity. Research concerning cognition and culture has resulted in models where culture is a factor in cognition (Busenitz & Lau, 1996; Mitchell, Smith, Seawright, & Morse, 2000). As defined in these studies, culture is a consistent set of values that influences everyday practices. This contrasts with recent work in cultural sociology where culture is seen to be fragmented, with less influence on normative behavior than previously believed (DiMaggio, 1997), and in cultural psychology, where it has been shown that individuals may inhabit more than one culture (biculturalism) and switch between the cultures based on cues in the environment (Hong, Morris, Chiu, & Benet-Martinez, 2000). The purpose of this article is to offer an alternative approach to the relationship between culture and Native American entrepreneurship. Specifically, we argue that Native Americans participate in and receive environmental cues from two cultures-the dominant culture of the United States and the culture of their native tribe. This bicultural status results in frame switching when individuals interpret their environment (including opportunities) based on the cultural cues accessible at the time of decision (Hong et al., 2000). As bicultural people, Native Americans are able to call upon seemingly inconsistent elements of their different cultures depending on particular contextual clues. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».