MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138359213 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n19p45

Categorizing and Fixing Variables on Entrepreneurial Intention through Qualitative Research

2014· article· en· W2138359213 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammad Amsal Sahban, Dileep Kumar M., Subramaniam Sri Ramalu

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityIndonesianEntrepreneurshipEntrepreneurial educationGovernment (linguistics)CurriculumQuality (philosophy)PsychologyEntrepreneurship educationPublic relationsIndonesian governmentQualitative researchDelphi methodMarketingArgument (complex analysis)Medical educationBusinessSociologyPedagogyPolitical scienceSocial psychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many policies and regulations have been made by Indonesian Government to enhance the quality of graduates in higher education. Numerous programs have been launched to build the mentality and business awareness of university students such as National Science Fair (PIMNAS), Student Entrepreneur Program (PMW), Student Creativity Program (PKM), Business Incubation Program and many other programs that can enhance the propensity of the students to start up a business. However, there are only 17% of the graduates who are willing to become entrepreneurs each year. This indicates that students have a lack of intentions to become entrepreneurs. However, there is less research and literature to support the argument that the students do not have entrepreneurial intention. In order to explore the entrepreneurial intention among the Indonesian students graduating universities and business schools from a qualitative study was conducted. The methodology used to develop an appropriate variable for entrepreneurial intention is focused group discussion (FGD), case analysis, interviews and Delphi technique measures the student's entrepreneurial intention. There are 20 experts were willing to take part in this study and the study identified 4 factors that eventually suit the student desire to deal with entrepreneurship. This study gives a valuable contribution to the higher education institutions, to orient the students to become entrepreneurs through right grooming by ensuring better entrepreneurship program as well as the curriculum.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207