MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387055095 · doi:10.1177/00346446231200655

Entrepreneurial Risk Attitude in Micro and Small Enterprises: Evidence From Urban Ethiopia

2023· article· en· W4387055095 on OpenAlexaff
Araar Abdelkerim, Yesuf Awel, Jonse Boka, Hiwot Menkir, Ajebush Shafi, Eleni Yitbarek, Mulatu Fekadu Zerihun

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Review of Black Political Economy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk aversion (psychology)PreferenceFinancial literacySocioeconomic statusEconomicsMarital statusFinancial riskDemographic economicsRegression analysisPsychologyActuarial scienceDemographyFinancial economicsMicroeconomicsExpected utility hypothesisFinanceSociologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyze the risk attitude of women and men entrepreneurs in the micro and small enterprises (MSEs) and investigate the factors that influence the risk attitude of MSE owners. The empirical analysis of the study consists of two parts. First, we use a moment-based approach to estimate the risk preferences of male and female entrepreneurs. Second, we estimate a regression model to understand the correlates of risk attitude and decompose the gender difference in risk aversion using the Oaxaca-Blinder technique. The results indicate that MSE entrepreneurs are risk-averse, with a relative risk premium of 1.5%. We also find that females are slightly more risk-averse than male entrepreneurs. Our regression estimates show that entrepreneurs’ risk attitude is significantly correlated with the age and experience of the entrepreneur, marital status, education level and financial literacy, wealth, sector, and business form. Furthermore, the predictor variables significantly explain the gender difference in risk aversion, while the unexplained component is insignificant. This suggests that the gender difference in risk aversion is due to disparities in socioeconomic factors than a biological difference in risk preference.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Review of Black Political EconomySame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207