MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035776813 · doi:10.1515/erj-2019-0201

Moving from Intentions to Actions in Youth Entrepreneurship: An Institutional Perspective

2020· article· en· W3035776813 on OpenAlexaff
Galina Shirokova, Oleksiy Osiyevskyy, Karina Bogatyreva, Linda F. Edelman, Tatiana S. Manolova

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrepreneurship Research Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersRussian Science Foundation
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipSituational ethicsPerspective (graphical)Quality (philosophy)Scale (ratio)Public relationsOrder (exchange)BusinessMarketingPolitical sciencePsychologySocial psychologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Situational factors may facilitate or frustrate the translation of entrepreneurial intentions into subsequent actions. In this study, we use data from two waves of a large-scale cross-country study of student entrepreneurship, the Global University Entrepreneurial Spirit Students' Survey (GUESSS), conducted in 2011 and 2013/2014 (n = 1434 students from 142 universities in nine countries), in order to investigate the impact of country-level institutions (financial market institutions and legal institutions) on the link between entrepreneurial intentions and subsequent start-up activities. We find that the quality of legal institutions has a significant positive impact on the translation of intentions into actions, whereas the quality of the national financial system does not influence the intentions-actions link. Theoretical and public policy implications are discussed.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntrepreneurship Research JournalSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207