MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400921082 · doi:10.36315/2024v1end047

Factorial structure validation of the Entrepreneurship Qualities Questionnaire 2.0

2024· article· en· W4400921082 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFactorialEntrepreneurshipFactorial analysisComputer sciencePsychologyStatisticsMathematicsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Entrepreneurs are more than ever very important economic actors in all societies.In many countries such as Canada, governments are mobilizing school curricula to include activities aimed to develop entrepreneurship competencies in high school students.However, there is no clear data on the actual level of these competencies among high school students and adults as well (Yergeau & Gingras, 2023).Accordingly, there is also few instruments intended to evaluate dimensions of entrepreneurship.This study examines the factorial solution of a modified version of an open online instrument aiming at measuring entrepreneurship qualities.The original Entrepreneurship Qualities Questionnaire (EQQ, L'Heureux et al., 2000) contains 59 items grouped in 6 continuous scales (Commitment, Motivation, Result-oriented, Creativity, Self-competition, Leadership) and a Total score.The EQQ 2.0 is an updated version based on previous work showing some items factor loadings were problematic in the original factorial solution (Yergeau, Busque-Carrier, Gingras & Lépine, 2023).A sample of 5527 high school students and n=5309 adults from the province of Québec have answered the EQQ between 2013 and 2023.An exploratory structural equation modeling within confirmatory factor analysis (EwC) was used to assess the second-order factor structure used by the EQQ 2.0.EwC mostly replicated the novel four first-order and one second-order factor structure.Results were validated with a subsample.Overall, these findings support the utility of the EQQ 2.0 to assess entrepreneurship qualities.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences→French-language works237,207→