How Does Institutional Context Influence Entrepreneurship Education Outcomes? Evidence from Two African Countries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we proposed an analytical framework based on the institutional theory to analyze the effect of institutional context on the impact of entrepreneurship education (EE). The influence of institutional environment was captured through three variables, namely perceived government support, perceived cultural norms, and social legitimacy of entrepreneurship. Based on a sample of 788 respondents from two African countries, our results show that beyond EE, institutional context is equally a determining factor of students’ entrepreneurial intention. Thus, a favorable institutional environment increases the students’ entrepreneurial intention. Our results also reveal that the positive effect of EE is higher when government policies are conducive to entrepreneurship development while it is lower when socio-cultural context (cultural norms, social legitimacy) is conducive to entrepreneurship. Thus, this study shows that informal institutions have a contingency effect while formal institutions play a complementary role in the impact of EE on students’ entrepreneurial intention.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it