Toward rigor and parsimony: a primary validation of Kolvereid’s (1996) entrepreneurial attitudes scales
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
Questioning the validity of scholarly work is not a typical path to publication in the management field. However, although considerable scholarship assesses entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions models of behaviour, methodological weaknesses in scale development have hampered scholars’ ability to rigorously interpret and build upon their research findings. We review 20 years of research and discover that the pioneer measure of entrepreneurial attitudes as a predictor of self-employment intentions, has yet to be empirically validated. We show that construct and measurement differences, one-off modifications to existing scales and a lack of adequate justification may partially explain why studies in the entrepreneurship education domain have produced inconsistent results. We address this limitation by performing factor analytic techniques on data from two sets of English-speaking university students from two North American countries. The result is a more parsimonious and streamlined ‘mini-Kolvereid’ scale. We further demonstrate that this scale is an effective predictor of entrepreneurial intentions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it