MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116847854 · doi:10.5539/jel.v15n3p128

Entrepreneurial Characteristics, Development Needs, and a Proposed Development Model for Royal Thai Army Reservists before Discharge: A Mixed-Methods Study

2025· article· W7116847854 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hasanai Hatawong, Chintana Kanjanavisutt, Pattarawat Jeerapattanatorn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindsetCreativityEntrepreneurshipQualitative researchQualitative propertyRanking (information retrieval)CoachingProfessional development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the entrepreneurial characteristics, development needs, and proposed a development model for Royal Thai Army reservists before discharge. A mixed-methods design was employed, combining quantitative data from 416 reservists via a structured questionnaire with qualitative insights from interviews with 10 reservists and five commanding officers. Quantitative results indicated high levels across seven entrepreneurial characteristics: motivation (M = 4.12), integrity (M = 3.94), creativity (M = 3.75), reflection (M = 3.75), opportunity recognition (M = 3.47), risk-taking (M = 3.57), and problem-solving (M = 3.53). Development needs were also high in all dimensions, with motivation (M = 4.05) and integrity (M = 4.01) ranking highest. Qualitative findings revealed diverse entrepreneurial aspirations—mainly in food, retail, livestock, and logistics—while highlighting strengths such as integrity, discipline, and perseverance, alongside gaps in creativity, opportunity recognition, and risk management. Reservists favored practical, hands-on training, short theoretical sessions, access to funding, and market opportunities within or near military facilities. Commanding officers emphasized similar strengths but noted constraints, including limited capital, low education, insufficient business knowledge, and a reliance on orders. They recommended integrating mindset training, basic business skills, and innovation into blended workshops with real-market simulations and post-discharge support. The integrated results inform a comprehensive development framework centered on creativity, opportunity identification, and practical operations, supported by institutional facilitation and mentoring to enhance entrepreneurial readiness.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designQualitative
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 Education and Learning→Same topicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences→French-language works237,207→