MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124486764

Successful Women Entrepreneurs as Pioneers: Results from a Study Conducted in Karaikudi, Tamil Nadu, India

2005· article· en· W3124486764 on OpenAlexaff
Elaine Porter, K. V. Nagarajan

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicIndian Economic and Social Development
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTamilWomen entrepreneursWork (physics)Female entrepreneursFocus groupEntrepreneurshipGender studiesPolitical scienceEconomic growthPublic relationsSociologyBusinessMarketingEngineeringLawEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research sought to study women entrepreneurs' experiences in terms of their motives and the obstacles they faced in establishing and growing their businesses. Nine women entrepreneurs in a small southern Indian town with entrepreneurial training and who had been running in their business for at least five years were part of a focus group. Gender-neutral and gendered motives guided their decision to enter into the business even if partnered with a male. Patriarchal norms within and outside family provided many challenges along the way. Work-family conflicts were among them. Women used gender-based strategies to manage interactions with governmental and bank officials and a professional demeanour to deal with male clients. Children sometimes participated in their businesses after school. By being successful entrepreneurs, these women proved to be pioneers in their milieu. Policy suggestions and research directions follow.(Publication Abstract)

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicIndian Economic and Social DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207