The Status of International Ethnic Entrepreneurship Studies: A Co-citation Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the literature of international ethnic entrepreneurship research and explores its historical development over the past four decades. With citation data from Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), including 627 journal articles and 25,731 cited references, we conducted a co-citation analysis to explore the intellectual structure of international ethnic entrepreneurship studies. The results show that international ethnic entrepreneurship studies focus on Chinese ethnic entrepreneurs, followed by Cubans, Koreans and blacks. The results also show that contemporary international ethnic entrepreneurship studies have shifted their foci from exploring ethnic-immigrant enclaves to studying immigrant business and self-employment as well as social embeddedness in ethnic business over the past four decades. This study thus identifies the knowledge essentials of ethnic entrepreneurship research and profiles the most influential journals, publications and scholars and their relationships in this field. The results of this study also provide a useful tool for researchers to access the literature of international ethnic entrepreneurship research.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it