MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Schooling and entrepreneurship: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design

2025· article· en· W4414573932 on OpenAlexaff
Simon C. Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business Venturing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegression discontinuity designExploitHuman capitalNatural experimentProductivityAffect (linguistics)Discontinuity (linguistics)Education policyRegression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Does an additional year of formal education affect the decision to become an entrepreneur? Using human capital theory as a conceptual lens, we explore three channels through which it might: productivity, certification, and health impacts. To test the mechanisms and uncover whether there are causal relationships between these variables, we exploit two exogenous changes to British compulsory schooling laws that generated sharp across-cohort differences in years of education. Using a fuzzy regression discontinuity design, we estimate that the reforms significantly reduced self-employment. We go on to explore which channels best explain this finding, and discuss implications for scholars and policymakers. • A Regression Discontinuity Design is used to obtain causal estimates of the relationship between high school education and adult entrepreneurship. • The study exploits as a natural experiment legal reforms to the national minimum school leaving age in Britain. • Estimates indicate a negative relationship between an additional year of schooling and engagement in self-employment. • The findings cast doubt on the notion that the additional schooling affected self-employment through productivity or credentialing channels. • Policy implications might be most applicable to developing countries where governments are exploring whether to raise school leaving ages.

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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business VenturingSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207