MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894012983 · doi:10.1177/1042258718801597

Psychological Resilience and Its Downstream Effects for Business Survival in Nascent Entrepreneurship

2018· article· en· W2894012983 on OpenAlexafffund
Ingrid C. Chadwick, Jana L. Raver

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrepreneurship Theory and Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityConcordia University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipPsychological resilienceConstruct (python library)Resilience (materials science)PsychologyTest (biology)Social psychologyCognitionSociologyPositive economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While scholars frequently argue that nascent entrepreneurs will be more successful if they are resilient, this assumption remains untested and the mechanisms for its potential benefits are unknown. To establish the utility of this psychological construct, we draw from Fredrickson's broaden-and-build theory (1998 ) to develop and test theory on the processes through which psychological resilience influences first-time entrepreneurs' business survival. Results of a time-lagged study of nascent entrepreneurs followed over a 2-year period support this theory, highlighting the cognitive and behavioral ways in which psychological resilience helps nascent entrepreneurs become less vulnerable to their stressful circumstances.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 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

Citations195
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntrepreneurship Theory and PracticeSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207