How does a subsequent entrepreneurship career choice develop? A set-theoretic analysis testing hope theory
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
This research explores the complex mechanism leading to a subsequent entrepreneurship career choice (SECC), whether perceived as a failure or not. It mobilizes the theory of hope (via the role of optimism and grit) and the components of the theory of planned behavior (attitude, subjective norms, and self-efficacy). The study involved 48 previous entrepreneurs not currently in the reentry process. A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis was used. Results reveal that the entrepreneurial attitude forged through first-hand experience is the most critical element in understanding an SECC. Optimism can substitute for this attitude, and grit plays a lesser role, as do the other variables. This study underscores the central role of attitude and optimism in explaining entrepreneurial career persistence, transitioning from a novice to a serial entrepreneur, with grit playing a somewhat secondary role. Configurational approaches prove essential to understanding entrepreneurial intention, notably for an SECC.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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