MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2983314286 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2019.10.032

Developing student’s social entrepreneurial intention

2019· article· en· W2983314286 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Susetyo Darmanto, Emiliana Sri Pujiarti

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of emotional intelligence, experience of social experience, previous entrepreneurial experience, environmental support toward social entrepreneurial intention with mediating role of social entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Research sample consisted of 125 students who has some social experience and entrepreneurship from various universities in Semarang. The data carried out in 2019 and analyzed with a Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) using AMOS v 21. The results show that emotional intelligence, social activities, previous entrepreneurial experience were significantly and positively associated with social entrepreneurial, self-efficacy and social entrepreneurial intention. Social entrepreneurial self-efficacy significantly and positively influenced on social entrepreneurial intention. However, the effects of environmental support on social entrepreneurial intention was insignificant. The significant mediating role of student's social entrepreneurial self-efficacy in developing social entrepreneurial intention showed significant contribution of social cognitive theory and career development theory to realize student's social entrepreneurial intention. University and government are requested to give more attention in developing social entrepreneurship in order to have more social entrepreneur graduated from universities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207