Mobilizing Volitional Capacities to Enhance Entrepreneurial Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Volition is a psychological disposition required in the process of transforming entrepreneurial intentions into actions (Hikkerova et al., 2016). To contribute to the understanding of the role volition plays in this process, the present study tests a hypothesis currently prevailing in the literature, and which stipulates that the order of mobilization of volitional capacities is determined by the stage individuals have reached in the process of business creation and innovation. The causal track modeling (Noel, 2015) carried out in an entropic context with data collected from 103 students, 319 potential entrepreneurs and 467 active entrepreneurs eliminated the methodological constraints of a longitudinal study which is necessary in such circumstances. Our results fully support the initial hypothesis and confirm the hierarchical organization of volitional capacities throughout the entrepreneurial process; starting with self-determination, self-motivation and resistance to uncertainty at the entrepreneurial-intent initiation stage, paving the way to concentration, direction and control of action at the beginning of the implementation of the project. These factors are then relayed by personal initiative and proactivity at the time when the project is being piloted and realized.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".