MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003154689 · doi:10.5430/bmr.v3n4p82

Women and Entrepreneurship: A Gender Comparison in Spain

2014· article· en· W2003154689 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marta Peris‐Ortiz, Carlos Devece, Carlos Rueda‐Armengot, Vicenta Fuster Estruch

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness and Management Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitat Politècnica de València
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipInstitutionalisationWomen entrepreneursAffect (linguistics)RationalityHuman capitalPerceptionFemale entrepreneursGender balanceBalance (ability)SociologyDemographic economicsPsychologySocial psychologyGender studiesEconomicsPolitical scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the institutionalization of men’s and women’s roles in today’s society, three key issues affect women’s entrepreneurial capacity. First, women seek to balance their family and professional lives. Second, capitalist society uses male-dominated values and instrumental rationality to pre-define success. Third, according to the literature, women possess less human capital than men do. Nevertheless, this study does not corroborate the finding that women possess less human capital than men do. Furthermore, results reveal non-significant gender differences in individuals’ perceptions of whether women have the necessary skills to become entrepreneurs and whether society positively values entrepreneurship. This study shows that women’s entrepreneurial potential is very similar to that of men. The study was carried out using data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) for the period 2001–2010.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness and Management ResearchSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207