MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286008452 · doi:10.1515/erj-2022-2001

Introduction: Gender and Entrepreneurship

2022· article· en· W4286008452 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrepreneurship Research Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFamily Business Performance and Succession
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipBusiness managementBusiness administrationBusinessFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Special Issue on Gender and Entrepreneurship, this subject is examined from multiple perspectives.Like a diamond, the topic is multi-faceted and requires a holistic treatment if we are even to begin to understand its complexity and its value.The work curated here is constituted of two invited editorials, an invited research paper and six competitive research articles, representing the scholarly efforts of respected researchers in this field, established and emerging.It is hoped that this collection will inspire still more scholarship in this important and growing area of entrepreneurship research.The Special Issue begins with two invited editorials that set the context and tone for this collection of work.Mustafa and Treanor provide us with insights into the evolution of the field of gender and entrepreneurship, with a focus on the importance of context.They call for the incorporation of gender considerations in all future entrepreneurship research.Jennings and Tonoyan explore the potential for further increasing our knowledge regarding gender stereotyping in the entrepreneurship context.They suggest three "paths" such research might take, providing a theoretical foundation for each and offering questions that might be investigated.Both of these editorials advocate for more of the type of research pursued in the invited and competitive articles found in this issue.The invited research paper by Henry et al. delves into policy and practice as it pertains to the financing of women-owned entrepreneurial ventures.Using the countries of Canada, Ireland and the US as context, they apply institutional theory to detect gaps in policy and practice and draw international comparisons.In doing so, they highlight the importance of context in shaping policy regarding the financing of women's entrepreneurial ventures, amplifying the observations of Mustafa and Treanor in their editorial.The essence of the competitive research articles is captured very effectively in the table found in Mustafa and Treanor's editorial.These papers explore a diversity of topics within the field of gender and entrepreneurship including

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.228 · 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