Gender and entrepreneurial self-efficacy: a learning perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the four major factors known to contribute to self-efficacy in general (enactive mastery, vicarious experience, physiological arousal and verbal persuasion) can help account for observed differences in the entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) of young women and men, in particular. Design/methodology/approach – The authors adopted a two-stage design, which included collecting data from 222 university students via an online survey followed by a quasi-experiment involving an opportunity evaluation task. Findings – The findings demonstrate that the significantly lower ESE of the young women in the sample was attributable to their lower level of prior entrepreneurial experience, their lower level of positive and negative affect towards entrepreneurship and their higher likelihood of receiving failure feedback due to their actual performance on an opportunity evaluation task. Research limitations/implications – Given the importance of understanding why females continue to be under-represented in entrepreneurial activity the world over, these findings provide additional insight into why young women tend to feel less efficacious than young men about their ability to successfully undertake an entrepreneurial career. Originality/value – This paper offers a comprehensive and unified theoretical framework, derived from social learning theory, for furthering the understanding of the factors that contribute to gender differences in ESE. The authors also offer a novel quasi-experimental design involving an opportunity evaluation task that others might find useful, particularly for empirical research adopting a cognitive and/or affective lens on entrepreneurship.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".