Not for the faint of heart? A gendered perspective on psychological distress in entrepreneurship.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our research was motivated by the goal of better understanding how male and female first-time entrepreneurs psychologically appraise key stressors during the business start-up process, and how these stress appraisals are related to psychological distress after business launch. Informed by role congruity theory (Eagly & Karau, 2002), we argue that financial and social stressors during business launch are appraised as particularly stressful by women. Both starting a business due to financial needs motivation (i.e., high agency) and failing to receive social support during business launch (i.e., low communion) are incongruent with the female gender role. We further argue that these negative stress appraisals early in the business launch process will be associated with higher psychological distress during the later stages of running their business. We investigated these relationships in a field study of nascent entrepreneurs surveyed at three time points over a 1-year period during which they developed and launched their first business. The results of this investigation support our hypotheses, such that female entrepreneurs had higher stress appraisals when faced with gender role incongruent stressors of high financial need and low social support. These higher stress appraisals among women were in turn related to higher psychological distress several months later during business operation compared with their male counterparts. We discuss these findings in light of their implications for psychological stress and strain among nascent entrepreneurs, as well as the unique challenges faced by women as they enter entrepreneurship. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".