What are the 11 characteristics of an entrepreneurial mindset by Orbis 2011

1Interdisciplinary Research Center for Finance and Digital Economy (IRC-FDE), Dammam Community College, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

Find articles by Basheer M. Al-Ghazali

Syed Haider Ali Shah

2Business Studies Department, Bahria University Islamabad, Islamabad, Pakistan

Find articles by Syed Haider Ali Shah

M. Sadiq Sohail

3Department of Management and Marketing, Interdisciplinary Research Center for Finance and Digital Economy (IRC-FDE), KFUPM Business School, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

Find articles by M. Sadiq Sohail

Disclaimer

1Interdisciplinary Research Center for Finance and Digital Economy (IRC-FDE), Dammam Community College, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

2Business Studies Department, Bahria University Islamabad, Islamabad, Pakistan

3Department of Management and Marketing, Interdisciplinary Research Center for Finance and Digital Economy (IRC-FDE), KFUPM Business School, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

What are the 11 characteristics of an entrepreneurial mindset by Orbis 2011
Corresponding author.

Edited by: Jesús-Nicasio García-Sánchez, Universidad de León, Spain

Reviewed by: Erum Shaikh, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University Shaheed Benazirabad, Pakistan; Irfan Ullah, Dalian University, China; Guojie Xie, Software Engineering Institute of Guangzhou, China

*Correspondence: Syed Haider Ali Shah, moc.liamg@11hahsrediah

This article was submitted to Personality and Social Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

Received 2022 Jun 9; Accepted 2022 Aug 11.

Copyright © 2022 Al-Ghazali, Shah and Sohail.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Abstract

The big five personality traits and entrepreneurial mindset (EM) are crucial individual-level elements that determine entrepreneurial intention (EI). This study examines the impact of big five personality traits and EM, on EI using the theory of planned behavior. Besides, this study examined the role of entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) and attitude toward entrepreneurship (ATE) influences EI. To achieve the research objectives, a quantitative approach was used. Structural equation modeling (SEM) and path analysis were conducted using SmartPLS software. Data were collected from 270 respondents through online questionnaires. Findings of the study revealed that big five personality traits influence ESE and ATE which led to EI. Finally, the moderating role of entrepreneurial passion was also found to have strong effect on influence ESE and ATE. This study offers evidence and insights that academics, educators, and others involved in the creation or expansion of entrepreneurial knowledge can use as a reference point.

Keywords: five big personality traits, entrepreneurial mindset, entrepreneurial passion, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, entrepreneurial intention

Introduction

Entrepreneurship plays a critical part in a country’s economic growth and development (; ), Individuals can use it as a feasible career option. It provides unemployed youth with a key path to self-sufficiency by allowing them to start their own business (). In governments failing to create jobs in such critical times, it is critical to create new jobs for young people as a self-employment (). The act of starting a business is preceded by “EIs” as an individual involved in taking advantage of opportunities that are available (). The literature on entrepreneurship has emphasized the importance of intentions in deciding whether or not to start a new business (; ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ). The desire to pursue a career as an entrepreneur is seen to be a key factor in determining the success of new companies. However, very few studies have considered the factors that influence individual intentions in context of Saudi Arabia. To gain greater knowledge of the factors that impact entrepreneurial intent could help ventures evolve more successfully, especially for university students, who are more likely to pursue self-employment that has a large impact on economic growth than those without a university education (). According to the literature, researchers advocated that there is a link between entrepreneurial intent and personality traits (). Furthermore, personality traits are becoming a more prominent research focus in the entrepreneurial and psychology literature. However, there is mixed opinion on the significance of personality in predicting entrepreneurial intent (). Personality traits, which are shaped by values and beliefs, are crucial in guiding entrepreneurial decision-making. As a result, investigating this underlying relationship by combining various concepts will provide an insight into the relationships. Thus, the first research question of the study is what is the impact of big five personality traits (BFPT) on entrepreneurship intention (EI)? The first objective of the study is to investigate BFPT and EI.

The importance of having an entrepreneurial mindset (EM) has gained a lot of attention (; ; ). Entrepreneurial mindset is conceptualized as the inclination for entrepreneurship is based on the way of being critical and abilities of being critical thinkers (; ). Individuals that have a more EM are more likely to seek out and exploit new chances and innovations (). Nevertheless, impact of EM on entrepreneurial intention (EI), on the other hand, has to be confirmed further (; ; ; ; ). Previous research has shown that having an EM can help in developing more dynamic skills and competencies. Very few studies have examined the role EM on EI. Therefore, the second objective of this study is to investigate the impact of EM on EI.

A variety of factors influence one’s decision to pursue entrepreneurship as a career including self-efficacy (), social context (; ), education (). In addition, self-efficacy (SE) decides whether or not you want to be an entrepreneur (). Moreover, SE is the determination required to generate a result that is closest to action or action intentionality . Self-employment highly depends on these perceptions of self-efficacy (), which can be applied to predict the EI. In addition to that, SE has been identified as a critical antecedent in the creation of EIs in several research (). SE was found to be a significant predictor of EIs and/or activity (). Within the context of entrepreneurship, the role of personality traits in deciding on a career path is also studied within the attraction-selection-attrition (ASA) framework as this framework posits that people like to work in situations with others who have similar personality characteristics to them (). This study attempts to fill the multiple gaps. First, the BFPT, as well as entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE), are considered determinant elements in an individual’s EI in this study which are rarely studied together in literature and most of the studies have advocated to investigate the relationship among them (; ; ). This study focuses on these personal characteristics based on a large body of evidence that the BFPT and ESE play a predictive role in EI (). Previous empirical studies produced mixed outcomes on the study of individual personalities and their EI (; ; ; ).

Psychological characteristics are linked to business formation and success, according to meta-analytic evaluations (). Such traits impact individual’s willingness to engage in entrepreneurial activity. Yet, several entrepreneurship studies initially concluded that psychological personality assessments were ineffective (). With the emergence of meta-analytic studies in entrepreneurship and big-five personality traits linked to entrepreneurial goals, this assumption changed (; ). According to psychologists, attitude, which serves as the foundation for a person’s opinion and justification of conduct, has a significant impact on individual intentions (). As a result, it’s necessary to look into this link (; ). After reviewing the literature, it has been found that attitude has a significant role in university students’ desire to start a business or enterprise (; ). Personality traits have been widely addressed among individual variations; however, only a few empirical research have looked at how these traits effects on EI among students (). Education industry plays a significant role in the EI (). To fill this second research gap, this research study intends to investigate the role of BFPT and EM on EI among students. Another gap this study intends to fill is to investigate the role of EM on attitude toward entrepreneurship (ATE). Similarly, entrepreneurial passion (EP) is very crucial in the EI (). Moreover, according to (), the EP is a strong emotion that has the potential to help people reach their full potential. Moreover, enthusiasm drives people to pursue their dreams of starting their own business which is entrepreneurial activities. Very limited number of studies check the EP as a moderator. Third, this study fills the gap by investigating the moderating role of the EP on the relationship between ATE, ESE, and EI. Moreover, studies have highlighted to investigate the above relationships in Saudi Arabia context (; ; ; ). Therefore, fourth, this study fills the gap by extending the existing literature of BFPT and entrepreneurial mindset by providing the empirical evidence from developing country context (Saudi Arabia), and data were collected from students from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) including both private and public universities.

The framework of this research study has been developed after a through literature review, in this framework, the impact of BFPT has been examined on EI directly and EM on EI directly and indirectly through the ESE and ATE. More interestingly, the moderating role of EP has also been investigated which were highlighted by multiple research studies. This framework in Figure 1, is unique of its kind that it has been developed by combining the holistic research studies and based on multiple research gaps which are discussed in the above paragraphs. In total 10 hypotheses are developed to test the framework of the study.

What are the 11 characteristics of an entrepreneurial mindset by Orbis 2011

Open in a separate window

Figure 1

Conceptual framework of the study.

Literature review

Theory of planned behavior

The elements of this theory of planned behavior (TPB), the first is perceived desirability, which refers to a person’s attitude toward entrepreneurship (ATE) or level of interest in it. When faced with a number of problems and options, a person can become overwhelmed and may decide whether or not to react based on an early assessment of the conduct ().

The big five personality traits and entrepreneurial intention

In order to describe major personality traits, a comprehensive model known as the big five models was constructed as human personality is complex broad categories (). The five factors received widespread support after the model was introduced-conscientiousness, openness to experience, emotional stability, extraversion, and agreeableness – proposed by the model causing the big five to be the most often used personality locus ().

A lot of research studies have focused on whether the BFPT have an impact on EI (; ; ; ; ; ). A brief review of the literature is provided below to support the relevance of the BFPT to EI.

Conscientiousness. It can be referred to Individuals with usually having the qualities of working hard, planning well, remaining organized and ready when asked to perform duties and tasks (; ; ; ). Entrepreneurship and conscientiousness are closely related. A person who has a strong desire to be successful and remained motivated toward achieving their set goals tend to have more traits of an entrepreneur (; ). Entrepreneurs are people who dislike doing the same thing over and over again, who take personal responsibility for their actions and desire to see tangible outcomes of their choices, actions, and decisions (). In personality studies, conscientiousness was found to be a trait which actually differentiates managers from entrepreneurs (). The meta-analysis study conducted by highlighted that conscientiousness was found to be consistent and vital dimension that is closely related to EI. In addition to that, another study found no significant differences in conscientiousness between those who take the initiatives as entrepreneurs and those who do not take such type of initiatives which are non-entrepreneurs (; ).

Openness to experience. This big five model dimension is defined as well as a person’s inquisitiveness for taking initiative with new ideas, concepts, and the value system as well as their desire to strive for novel, unusual, and unique (; ; ). Those individuals with a high amount of openness to experience score are likely to be more in terms of creativeness and imagination while thinking in a different way to try novel things (; ). An entrepreneur is a person who is efficient and innovative, according to . Openness to new experiences shows the clear distinction between the professionals and entrepreneurs as it is based on emotional stability and extraversion which is referred as vital element (). Openness to new experiences was the second most strongly linked personality trait to the desire to start a business ().

Emotional stability. When individuals are in state of relax and remained clam during the tough time or the inconvenient times, they are considered emotionally stable. Emotions that bring the negative energy in form of anxiety, fear of loss, or fear of unknown lead to the emotional instability (). Scholars and practitioners highlighted that in order to start the new venture or any type of the business, the confidence level, ability to handle the pressure, and resilience to perform different activities in difficult times are based on emotional stability (; ; ). Regarding this particular trait, there is a variety of results. A study highlighted that they did not find a significant difference in neuroticism between entrepreneurs and nonentrepreneurs, according to the study conducted by .

Extraversion. Individuals with high level of extraversion tend to be more pleasant, friendly, gregarious, lively, moreover, they have the tendency to be dominating and assertive in social circle. Assertion means claim and persuasion in terms of influence are typically displayed by those with high-level communication capabilities and social impact (; ). Entrepreneurs need to organize and manage their subordinates and teams, in order to encourage their innovative business concepts to employees and customers () and extraverts are more likely to find this easier than introverts. Despite this, earlier research on the trait of extraversion in entrepreneurs has been inconclusive (; ). In addition to that, in a meta-analysis, no significant difference was found between managers and entrepreneurs ().

Agreeableness. Individuals with higher level of agreeableness tend to be having the attributes of trusting, altruistic, compassionate, and quality of forgiveness (). In addition to that, entrepreneurs are considered to be more cooperative and supportive yet for such attributes, the level of high motivation and energy is required (; ). Another study highlighted that one of the main attributes of the entrepreneur is to develop trust building measure with team members as well as with all stakeholders (; ), further, they highlighted that entrepreneur also must build trust with their customers. According to empirical research, being agreeable is related with a lower likelihood of becoming an entrepreneur (). Despite the findings of in meta-analysis, there was no evidence of a link between the Big Five model’s agreeableness construct and entrepreneurial intent. As a result, we suggest the following hypothesis.

H1: BFPT is positively associated with EI.

Entrepreneurial mindset and entrepreneurial intention

One of the most significant predictors of entrepreneurial behavior has been identified as EI resulting in the establishment of new enterprises (; ; ; , ; ; ; ). Entrepreneurial intention, according to , is the entrepreneur’s natural knowledge, propensity, and behavioral proclivity to start a new business. Study by , EI is the belief that entrepreneurs want to start a firm. To put it another way, entrepreneurs are the individuals whose intentions are primarily focused with entrepreneurial outcomes which are only business centric (; ). Other researchers claim that mindset and mentality are a broader vision that is used to make new recommendations, assess risks and opportunities related to have new business initiatives depends on the border perspective of individual perception rather than in a particular way or features (; ; ). Previous research has found that the association between entrepreneurial attitude and ambition to be an entrepreneur has a beneficial effect (Burke and Aldrich, 1984; ; ; ; ; ; ; ). As a result, this study suggests the following hypothesis.

H2: Entrepreneurial mindset is positively associated with EI.

Big five personality traits and entrepreneurial self-efficacy

It also necessitates success in responsibilities such as invention, marketing, management, and finance that are associated with the start-up of a new enterprise (; ; ; ). Individuals’ personality traits have a significant impact on their self-efficacy (). The BFPT have been linked to SE in various studies (; ; ; ; ), Extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and responsibility are positively associated with SE, while neuroticism is adversely correlated (). Some researchers found that individuals who scored better on conscientiousness had stronger self-efficacy views (; ). Openness transforms requests into challenges to be met, resulting in increased level of engagement in different tasks and their self-efficacy (; ). According to research, agreeableness might lead to higher self-efficacy (). Individual SE is positively connected with extraversion and adversely correlated with neuroticism, according to some studies (). revealed that conscientiousness can be referred as a vital predictor of teacher’s SE, although another study by highlighted that the association between the conscientiousness, extraversion, and neuroticism is closely related and positive. Additionally, other researchers advocated that conscientiousness and extraversion lower down the neuroticism and enhance the self-efficacy (). As a result, this study suggests the following hypothesis.

H4: BFPT is positively related to ESE.

Big-five personality trait and attitude toward entrepreneurship

Individual persistent aims toward entrepreneurship are referred to as attitudes; which could be either have a positive or negative status and be influenced by the environment. According to , there is a positive association between (Agreeableness, extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness to new experiences are some of the Big-Five personality traits.) Neuroticism has a detrimental impact on entrepreneurial attitude (based on experience). Previous research has found to be one of major predictor of EI is one’s ATE (; ; ; , ; ). Personality traits can have an impact (; ). As a result, this study suggests the following hypothesis.

H5: BFPT is positively associated with ATE.

Entrepreneurial mindset and antecedents

It can be referred as taking unusual decisions in uncertain circumstances which require different and unique kind of thinking and judgments (). Moreover, EM, according to , highlighted that it involves not only the related experience, creativity in solving a problem, identifying the new ways of doing it along with identification of opportunity, but it also contains the way the entrepreneur thinks or thinking. Psychology, particularly personality psychology, is intrinsically tied to the EM (). The creation of an EM was discussed by , who affirmed that it is related with the ability to think creatively, to look for possibilities rather than problems, and to provide solutions rather than complain (; ; ; ). Examining an entrepreneur’s level of ESE is one way for them to better understand their own motivations, capabilities, and limitations, because ESE allows them to assess their own competency in carrying out entrepreneurial activities (; ; ; ; ). As a result, based on the information provided, the hypotheses are:

H3: EM is positively associated to ATE.

H6: EM is positively associated to ESE.

The role of attitude toward entrepreneurship on entrepreneurial intention

The level of being attracted toward entrepreneurship behavior and the belief system that allows one to take certain actions that will result in a positive outcome is referred to as one’s ATE. This was defined by as preferences and benefits or downsides, respectively. Whereas others described It’s a mindset for becoming an entrepreneur (). One’s attitude toward entrepreneurial behavior, according to , is a general assessment of that behavior, or whether it is favorable or not. Previous studies have revealed a statistically significant link between EI and ATE. Demonstrating that students see entrepreneurship as an enticing, desirable career option, and that if given the opportunity and resources, they would pursue entrepreneurial companies (, , ; ; ; ; ; , ; ; ; ). Based on previous studies, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H8: ATE is positively associated to EI.

The role of self-efficacy on entrepreneurial intention

ESE has been described in a variety of ways by researchers. The idea of “self-efficacy” was defined by as an individual’s belief in their talents Matsu aptitudes to execute specific tasks or assignments. The actions which are based on self-motivation, environment, and perception are depicted in this idea. It is a person’s belief in their potential to start a successful business enterprise (). ESE, according to , is an individual’s ability or talent to improve motivation, cognitive resources, and particular set of action plan that are essential in order to be successful in particular profession. As a result, ESE is an important cognitive predictor of entrepreneurial purpose and activity (). Previous research has demonstrated that it helps people become entrepreneurs (; ; ; ; ; ). Based on above information, this study presents the following hypothesis:

H7: ESE is positively associated to EI.

The potential moderator effect of entrepreneurial passion

EP is the inspiration that drives people to pursue entrepreneurial endeavors (; ). It’s also a powerfully good emotion that has the potential to help people reach their full capacity (; ). EP instills the courage to take risks and overcome challenges as a result of a love for business that expresses both emotionally and cognitively (; ). EP has the power to influence entrepreneurship thoughts, i.e., it has a significant impact on ESE (; ; ; ; ; ; ; ). Furthermore, enthusiasm has been shown to enhance confidence and competence in the context of particular activities and aims (; ; ). Few research studies have looked at the role of entrepreneurial enthusiasm in moderating cognitive antecedents. In undergraduate level students’ persistent EI, entrepreneurial enthusiasm showed a significant positive moderating influence on AT, perceived appeal, and perceived feasibility (). Individuals with EP may have a good perception of the outcomes of entrepreneurship. Hence, the following hypotheses are formed:

H9: EP moderates the relationship between ESE and EI.

H10: EP moderates the relationship between ATE and EI.

Research methodology

In this study, the hypothesized relationships were checked, the type of the study is quantitative through deductive approach while laid the foundation on the philosophical perspective of positivism. Additionally, respondents were students from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) including both private and public universities. The authors drew students from a wide range of academic disciplines, including business, economics, accounting, MIS, finance, and computer science. The authors contacted them via an online questionnaire with the help of faculty members. A survey link long with informed consent was provided via email to 390 students. The authors stated unequivocally that all information provided by our responders would not be disclosed. The samples were randomly selected. Emails of reminder were sent to all respondents who did not respond within due time of 3 weeks of receiving the survey link received. Finally, a total of 270 respondents responded to the questionnaire. Resulting in a response rate of 69%. Males made up the majority of the responders 65.63% and females 35.37%. Furthermore, 45.17% of the respondents had only temporary employment experience, while 54.83% were students.

Instruments and measures

For data collection, the survey approach was sued and it was the primary source of information. This study adapted the scales which are already existing to measure the concepts because prior research had demonstrated them to be valid and reliable. The BFPT were measured in this study using (TIPI) by , agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, openness to experience, and emotional stability. To measure EM, the six-item scale is used by researchers which was introduced by . To assess the ESE, researchers used scale which were introduced by , and . Moreover, four-item scale was used and adapoted from to measure ATE. While to measure EP, researchers used five-items introduced by . Lastly, to assess the EI, researchers used the scale introduced by .

Data analysis

Students’ demographic characteristics

According to the data gathered on gender-based received from students, males made up more than three-quarters of the total population of respondents (i.e., 65.63%), and females made up the rest of the group (i.e., 35.37%). As of age wise of students grouping, the majority of them are young age. The age group of 20–29 years accounted for 56.08 percent of all students. While the next largest category was found to be students above the age of 18. Only 17.03 percent and 4.97 percent of those aged 30–39 and 40–49 years, respectively, were found. When it comes to the students’ educational qualifications, Three-quarters of the population was expected to have a bachelor’s degree. Furthermore, more than 63 percent of all respondents took the subjects which are related to management and business as per their regular teaching course load according to their higher education requirements at various Saudi Arabian universities.

Assessment of measurement model

Convergent and discriminant validity were investigated using a series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs; ). While estimating the measurement model the four procedures be followed namely, internal consistency, composite reliability, indicator reliability, convergent, and discriminant validity. For internal consistency, composite reliability values were larger than 0.80, exceeding the minimum criteria of 0.70, and indicating internal consistency (). All of the items had loadings over the cutoff value and they were all retained. The average variance extracted (AVE) of each component was examined using a threshold value of 0.50 to determine convergent validity (). In this study, results supported the convergent validity as range is within the threshold as shown in Tables 13.

Table 1

Descriptive statistic.

VariablesMeanMaximumMinimumNumberSDBFPT3.50512700.956EM3.66512700.774ESE3.48512700.921ATE3.64512700.870EP3.60512700.758EI3.07512700.664

Open in a separate window

ESE, entrepreneurial self-efficacy; BFPT, Big-Five Personality Trait; EI, entrepreneurial intention EE; EM, entrepreneurial mindset; ATE, attitude toward entrepreneurship.

Table 3

Discriminant validity.

ConstructsESEBFPTEIEMATEESE0.859BFPT0.2360.713EI0.3140.3140845EM0.3160.2140.4120.784ATE0.2770.2180.5310.32.30.824

Open in a separate window

Diagonal elements (in bold) are the square root of AVE. Elements below the diagonal are the correlations among constructs. ESE, entrepreneurial self-efficacy; BFPT, Big-Five Personality Trait; EI, entrepreneurial intention EE; EM, entrepreneurial mindset; ATE, attitude toward entrepreneurship.

Table 2

Evaluation of the measurement model.

Construct itemsNumber of dimensionsFactor loadingAVECRCronbach’s alphaBig-Five Personality Trait (BFPT)BFPT 10.710.7120.8310.85BFPT 20.72BFPT 30.81BFPT 40.72BFPT 50.85BFPT 60.63BFPT 70.75BFPT 80.80BFPT 90.79BFPT 100.83Entrepreneurial mindset (EM)EM 10.810.7090.8570.82EM 20.83EM 30.74EM 40.78EM 50.74EM 60.71Entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE)ESE 10.870.7550.8410.81ESE 20.82ESE 30.72ESE 40.61ESE 50.69ESE 60.77Attitude toward entrepreneurship (ATE)ATE 10.710.6820.8800.88ATE 20.79ATE 30.68ATE 40.81Entrepreneurial passion (EP)EP 10.800.7310.8120.89EP 20.79EP 30.73EP 40.75EP 50.82Entrepreneurial intention (EI)EI 10.880.7420.8150.82EI 20.85EI 30.75EI 40.71EI 50.73EI 60.69

Open in a separate window

AVE, average variance extracted; CR, composite reliability.

The Fornell-Larcker criterion () and the Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio were used to assess discriminant validity (). Moreover, all of the AVEs on the diagonals in Table 3 were bigger than the corresponding row and column values, showing that the measures were discriminant. All HTMT ratio values in this investigation were less than the crucial value of 0.85, as determined by the cut-off value of 0.85 for proving discriminant validity. Results confirm the measurement model.

Multicollinearity and common method bias

This work used the software PLS to perform a full collinearity test (), to analyze collinearity simultaneously (; ). In Table 4, all of the values of VIF are less than 3.3, and all values of tolerances are greater than 0.10 which means they are in acceptable range. The whole collinearity test process appears to be successful in identifying common method bias (CMV). In addition to that, currently, the most used technique for examining CMV is the Harman single-factor test. According to our research, the characteristic root of the common factor with the highest explanatory power in the absence of factor rotation is 10.256, which accounts for 40.145 percent of the total variance. The majority of the covariance between independent variables and dependent variables cannot be explained by a single factor. It demonstrates that this study is free from significant CMV (; , ; ).

Table 4

Multicollinearity.

ConstructsToleranceVIFBig-Five Personality Trait (BFPT)0.7141,554Entrepreneurial mindset (EM)0.8372,354Entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE)0.7711,358Attitude toward entrepreneurship (ATE)0.9251,256Entrepreneurial intention (EI)0.6541,365Entrepreneurial passion (EP)0.7212,258

Open in a separate window

VIF, variance inflation factor.

Hypotheses testing

The hypotheses were tested using PLS-SEM. The structural model was examined using the coefficient of determination (R2), path coefficient (β), values of p, and effect sizes (f2) with a bootstrapping approach involving 5,000 sub-samples suggested by . In addition, in response to recent critiques that simply using values of p to test hypotheses is insufficient, this study used values of p with confidence ranges and effect sizes as additional criteria (). As a result, reliable and adequate criteria were developed to assess the hypotheses, as illustrated in Table 5.

Table 5

PLS hypothesis testing.

HypothesesβSEt-valuep-valueLLCIULCIResultH1: Big-Five Personality Trait → Entrepreneurial intention0.3670.0723.2540.000*0.0620.335SupportedH2: Entrepreneurial mindset → Entrepreneurial intention0.3330.0612.5870.002*0.0540.451SupportedH3: Entrepreneurial mindset → Attitude toward entrepreneurship0.2520.0623.5620.000**0.0610.363SupportedH4: Big-Five Personality Trait → Entrepreneurial self-efficacy0.2580.0594.2580.003*0.1630.314SupportedH5: Big-Five Personality Trait → Attitude toward entrepreneurship0.2620.0693.8970.000**0.1840.391SupportedH6: Entrepreneurial mindset → Entrepreneurial self-efficacy0.2710.0452.9850.002*0.0910.299SupportedH7: Entrepreneurial self-efficacy → Entrepreneurial intention0.4720.6613.3240.000**0.2240.399SupportedH8: Attitude toward entrepreneurship → Entrepreneurial intention0.3020.0554.5620.002*0.6420.301Supported

Open in a separate window

ESE, entrepreneurial self-efficacy; BFPT, Big-Five Personality Trait; EI, entrepreneurial intention EE; EM, entrepreneurial mindset; ATE, attitude toward entrepreneurship.

*p ≤ 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01.

The value of R2 for two endogenous latent constructs are 0.358 for the ESE and 0.337 for ATE which are in the range of acceptable and are moderate values (). Furthermore, this study used a blindfolding process to test the predictive relevance. As shown in Table 5, all of the effects are positive and significant at the 1% level or higher. The values of f2 can be small, medium, or large with cutoff value range is 0.02, 0.15, or 0.35 (, ). In terms of relationship of BFPT on EI, the H1 states, there is a positive relationship of FBPT on EI and was found to have positive and significant effect on EI (β = 0.367, f2 = 0.041, p < 0.001), thus H1 is supported, while the H2 states that there is a positive relationship of EM on EI and was found to have positive and significant effect on EI (β = 0.333, f2 = 0.032, p < 0.001). Therefore, H2 is supported.

In terms of the influence of BFPT on ESE and ATE, the H4 states that BFPT is positively related to ESE and was found to have a significant effect on ESE (β = 0.258, f2 = 0.031, p < 0.001). Thus, H4 is supported. Moreover, H5 states that BFPT has a significant positive impact on ATE (β = 0.262, f2 = 0.051, p < 0.001). Therefore, H5 is also supported.

The effect of the EM on ESE which is H6 and the effect of the EM on ATE which is H3, both state that EM is positively related to ESE and was found to have a positive effect on ESE (β = 0.271, f2 = 0.0612, p < 0.001), thus H6 is supported. Similarly, the H3 states that EP is positively related to ATE and was also found to have a positive effect on ATE (β = 0.252, f2 = 0.055, p < 0.001), Thus, it is supported.

While the relationship between the ESE and ATE on EI, Table 6 shows that ESE has strong and positive effect on EI (β = 0.472, f2 = 0.151, p < 0.001), thus H7 is supported. Furthermore, Table 5 shows that ATE was found to have positively related to EI (β = 0.302, f2 = 0.154, p < 0.001). Thus, supported H8.

Table 6

Moderation tests (indirect effects).

HypothesesβSEt-valuep-valueLLCIULCIResultH9: Entrepreneurial passion * Entrepreneurial self-efficacy → Entrepreneurial intention0.1520.0593.5870.000***0.0510.225SupportedH10: Entrepreneurial passion * Attitude toward Entrepreneurship → Entrepreneurial intention0.1320.0662.5470.000***0.0600.192Supported

Open in a separate window

ESE, entrepreneurial self-efficacy; BFPT, Big-Five Personality Trait; EI, entrepreneurial intention EE; EM, entrepreneurial mindset; ATE, attitude toward entrepreneurship.

***p ≤ 0.001; ns, not significant.

Moderation analyses were carried out by using the SPSS PROCESS macro (), presented in Table 6. Hypothesis H9 hypothesized that EP positively moderators the relationship between ESE and EI, which is also supported (β = 0.152, t = 3.587, 95% bias-corrected CI = [0.051, 0.225]). Similarly, the H10 hypothesized that EP positively moderators the relationship between ATE and EI, which is also supported (β = 0.132, t = 2.547, 95% bias-corrected CI = [0.060, 0.192]).

Discussion and conclusion

First, this study further provides the evidence of significance of FBPT and EM impact on students’ ESE, and ATE, all of which help to support EIs. According to the findings of this study, FBPT and EM positively influence the EIs which is consistent with the previous studies (; ).

Second, according to the findings of this study, FBPT and EM positively influence the ATE (; ; ; ; ). This finding highlights the importance of FBPT and EM in influencing students’ entrepreneurial goals by altering their attitudes toward entrepreneurship. Additionally, entrepreneurial attitudes influenced desires to become entrepreneurs significantly more in students who have FBPT and EM than the students who did not have the FBPT and EM. Similarly, FBPT and EM were found to have positive effect on ESE. As compared to the previous studies, this study offers, to help students develop a better grasp of entrepreneurial activities, this research suggests that FBPT and EM programs should be included as part of their projects and classes in order to build and cultivate the FBPT and EM. It is recommended to provide guidance on how to use a variety of specific skills and tactics to increase student self-efficacy when engaging in entrepreneurial activity.

Third, our findings revealed a significant positive link between entrepreneurship attitude and EI. Our findings are consistent with previous research studies and advocate that ATE is the strongest predictor of EI (). According to the findings, students would consider entrepreneurship to be a desirable and advantageous career option, and would pursue entrepreneurial ventures. As compared to the previous studies, this research reveals that ESE has a significant impact on EI consistent with previous findings (; ; ). As a result, when students have more belief in the success of entrepreneurship, they are more likely to contribute to entrepreneurial initiatives.

Fourth, another interesting finding from the study is the EP has a partial moderating influence on the relationship between ESE and ATE and EI. This finding is consistent with the studies conducted by and . It supports the notion that Entrepreneurship is a module should be placed in a dual/triple degree program for students. They develop positive entrepreneurial attitudes, consider themselves to be more appealing and capable of commencing a long-term entrepreneurial venture and their enthusiasm improves their EM and feasibility of starting a long-term enterprise.

This study provided a full research framework to assess three research questions that had yet to be addressed by previous research. With several contributions, the importance of BFPT and mindset in generating EI among university students is highlighted in this study. The EI is accelerated by EP as a moderator, according to the findings of this study. These findings could be used by decision-makers as a point of reference.

Implications of the study

This study’s findings have a number of academic and management implications. In academic context, when new antecedents are given to define an individual’s conduct, TPB can be utilized as a model to examine diverse profiles of entrepreneurial behavior and as a solid foundation to investigate its moderating influence. The findings of our research add to the theoretical perspectives of and , proving that entrepreneurship education may lead to students pursuing their entrepreneurial career goal which could lead to successful start-ups after completing the graduation studies (; ). In addition to that, the empirical evidence of this study support the assumption that an individual’s self-efficacy, along with his or her skill for pursuing motivation, and a plan of action, will be a crucial factor in the formulation of entrepreneurial goals, in accordance with SCCT.

In terms of the practical implications, BFPT and EM can enhance the EI in multiple ways. Two ways that FBPT and EM influence students’ EI are ESE and ATE (; ; ; ). Our findings support the idea that self-efficacy plays a significant role in the development of EI. As SCCT evolves, ESE is becoming more important in establishing entrepreneurial intent. Similarly, our research highlights the direct favorable impact of entrepreneurship attitudes on EI. As a result of our findings, the TPB () appears to be a viable theoretical framework for analyzing an individual’s EI.

Limitations and future directions

There are various limitations to this study that indicates areas where future research should be pursued. First, conducting the study with a pre- and post-test approach would have been fascinating (), such that differences in EI can be investigated different BFPT and entrepreneurial mind. Another limitation of this study is that it is cross-sectional in nature, longitudinal research should be carried out in future studies to investigate the changes in entrepreneurial attitudes and ambitions over time, as well as the development of new businesses of entrepreneurial conduct that is motivated by a desire to succeed. Third, to investigate future studies should investigate the EI with other moderator and mediator such as entrepreneurial leadership and entrepreneurial training, and entrepreneurial practice.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

SS and BA-G worked on the overall paper (introduction and literature review and developing the conceptual framework). MS worked on the paper methodology and data analysis. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the support received from King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals.

References

  • Ajzen I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Proc. 50, 179–211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ajzen I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 52, 27–58. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.27 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ajzen I. (2005). Attitudes, personality and behaviour. 2nd Edn. Berkshire: Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Ajzen I. (2011). “Behavioural interventions: Design and evaluation guided by the theory of planned behaviour,” in Social Psychology Program and Policy Evaluation. eds. Mark M. M., Donaldson S. I., Campbell B. C. (Guildford, New York: ). [Google Scholar]
  • Ajzen I., Cote N. G. (2008). “Attitudes and the prediction of behavior,” in Attitudes and Attitude Change. eds. Crano W. D., Prislin R. (New York, NY: Psychology Press; ), 289–311. [Google Scholar]
  • Aldrich H. E. (2012). The emergence of entrepreneurship as an academic field: a personal essay on institutional entrepreneurship. Res. Policy 41, 1240–1248. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.013 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Al-Hammadi D., Moore R. K. (2021). “Using sampling techniques and machine learning algorithms to improve big five personality traits recognition from non-verbal cues.” in 2021 National Computing Colleges Conference (NCCC), IEEE, 1–6.
  • Ali I., Ali M., Badghish S. (2019). Symmetric and asymmetric modeling of entrepreneurial ecosystem in developing entrepreneurial intentions among female university students in Saudi Arabia. Int. J. Gen. Entrepr. 11, 435–458. doi: 10.1108/IJGE-02-2019-0039 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Al-Mamary Y. H. S., Abdulrab M., Alwaheeb M. A., Alshammari N. G. M. (2020). Factors impacting entrepreneurial intentions among university students in Saudi Arabia: testing an integrated model of TPB and EO. Educ. Train. 62, 779–803. doi: 10.1108/ET-04-2020-0096 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Almeida P., Ahmetoglu G., Chamorro-Premuzic T. (2014). Who wants to be an entrepreneur? The relationship between cocational interests and individual differences in entrepreneurship. J. Career Assess. 22, 102–112. doi: 10.1177/1069072713492923 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Anjum T., Heidler P., Amoozegar A., Anees R. T. (2021). The impact of entrepreneurial passion on the entrepreneurial intention; moderating impact of perception of university support. Admin. Sci. 11:45. doi: 10.3390/admsci11020045 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Antoncic B., Bratkovic Kregar T., Singh G., DeNoble A. F. (2015). The big five personality entrepreneurship relationship: evidence from Slovenia. J. Small Bus. Manag. 53, 819–841. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12089 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ariani D. W. (2013). Personality and learning motivation. Eur. J. Bus. Manag. 5, 26–38. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Arshad M., Farooq O., Sultana N., Farooq M. (2016). Determinants of individuals’ entrepreneurial intentions: a gendercomparative study. Career Dev. Int. 21, 318–339. doi: 10.1108/CDI-10-2015-0135 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Autio E., Keeley R., Klofsten M., Parker G. C., Hay M. (2001). Entrepreneurial intent among students in Scandinavia and in the USA. Enterp. Innov. Manag. Stud. 2, 145–160. doi: 10.1080/14632440110094632 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Awwad M. S., Al-Aseer R. M. N. (2021). Big five personality traits impact on entrepreneurial intention: the mediating role of entrepreneurial alertness. Asia Pac. J. Innovat. Entrepr. 15, 87–100. doi: 10.1108/APJIE-09-2020-0136 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ayuni R. F. (2018). The role of family business and education in forming actual entrepreneurs. KnE Soc. Sci. 3, 329–340. [Google Scholar]
  • Baidi and Suyatno (2018). Effect of entrepreneurship education, self efficacy and need for achievement toward students’ entrepreneurship intention: case study in Febi, Iain Surakarta, Indonesia. J. Entrepr. Educ. 21, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  • Bandura A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. [Google Scholar]
  • Bandura A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am. Psychol. 37, 122–147. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bandura A. (1986). Fearful expectations and avoidant actions as coeffects of perceived self-inefficacy. Am. Psychol. 41, 1389–1391. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.41.12.1389 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Baron R. A., Markman G. D. (1999). “Cognitive mechanisms: potential differences between entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs,” in Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. eds. Reynolds P., Bygrave W., Manigart S., Mason C., Mason C., Meyer G., et al. (Babson Park, FL: Babson College; ), 123–137. [Google Scholar]
  • Baron R. A., Markman G. D., Hirsa A. (2001). Perceptions of women and men as entrepreneurship: evidence for differential effects of attributional augmenting. J. Appl. Psychol. 86, 923–929. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.923, PMID: [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Baron R. A., Shane S. (2007). Entrepreneurship: a process perspective. Psychol. Entrepr. 1, 19–39. [Google Scholar]
  • Baron R. A., Ward T. B. (2004). Expanding entrepreneurial cognition’s toolbox: potential contributors from the field of cognitive science. Entrep. Theory Pract. 28, 553–573. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2004.00064.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Baum J. R., Frese M., Baron R. A. (2014). “Born to be an entrepreneur? Revisiting the personality approach to entrepreneurship,” in The Organizational Frontiers. The Psychology of Entrepreneurship. eds. Baum J. R., Frese M., Baron R. A. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; ), 41–65. [Google Scholar]
  • Baum J. R., Locke E. A. (2004). The relationship of entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to subsequent venture growth. J. Appl. Psychol. 89:587. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Bazkiaei H. A., Heng L. H., Khan N. U., Saufi R. B. A., Kasim R. S. R. (2020). Do entrepreneurial education and big-five personality traits predict entrepreneurial intention among universities students? Cogent Bus. Manag. 7:1801217. doi: 10.1080/23311975.2020.1801217 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bell R., Bell H. (2016). Replicating the networking, mentoring and venture creation benefits of entrepreneurship centres on a shoestring: a student-centred approach to entrepreneurship education and venture creation. Ind. High. Educ. 30, 334–343. doi: 10.1177/0950422216660921 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bellò B., Mattana V., Loi M. (2018). The power of peers: a new look at the impact of creativity, social context and self-efficacy on entrepreneurial intentions. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 24, 214–233. doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-07-2016-0205 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bierly P. E., Kessler E. H., Christensen E. W. (2000). Organizational learning, knowledge, and wisdom. J. Organ. Chang. Manag. 13, 595–618. doi: 10.1108/09534810010378605 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bignetti B., Santos A. C. M. Z., Hansen P. B., Henriqson E. (2021). The influence of entrepreneurial passion and creativity on entrepreneurial intentions. Rev. Adm. Mackenzie 22, 1–32. doi: 10.1590/1678-6971/eramr210082 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Biraglia A., Kadile V. (2016). The role of entrepreneurial passion and creativity in developing entrepreneurial intentions: insights from American homebrewers. J. Small Bus. Manag. 55, 170–188. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12242 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Biswas A., Verma R. K. (2021). Engine of entrepreneurial intentions: revisiting personality traits with entrepreneurial education. Benchmarking 29, 2019–2044. [Google Scholar]
  • Bögenhold D., Fachinger U. (2010). Entrepreneurship and its Regional Development: in Do Self-employment Ratios Converge and Does Gender Matter? The entrepreneurial society. Edward Elgar Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  • Bögenhold D., Fachinger U. (2014). Rationality of self-employment: Do female and male entrepreneurs differ? J. Bank. Finance 1, 42–62. [Google Scholar]
  • Bowen D. D., Hisrich R. D. (1986). The female entrepreneur: a career development perspective. Acad. Manag. Rev. 11, 393–407. doi: 10.2307/258468 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brandstätter H. (2011). Personality aspects of entrepreneurship: a look at five meta-analyses. Personal. Individ. Differ. 51, 222–230. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.007 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brown D., Cinamon R. G. (2016). Personality traits’ effects on self-efficacy and outcome expectations for high school major choice. Inter. J. Edu. Voc. Gui. 16, 343–361. doi: 10.1007/s10775-015-9316-4 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brown S. D., Lent R. W., Telander K., Tramayne S. (2011). Social cognitive career theory, conscientiousness, and work performance: a meta-analytic path analysis. J. Vocat. Behav. 79, 81–90. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2010.11.009 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Buana Y., Hidayat D., Prayogi B., Vendy V. (2017). The effect of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intention of university students by adopting Linan model. Binus Bus. Rev. 8, 67–75. doi: 10.21512/bbr.v8i1.1958 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Burnette J. L., Pollack J. M., Forsyth R. B., Hoyt C. L., Babij A. D., Thomas F. N., et al. (2019). A growth mindset intervention: enhancing students’ entrepreneurial self-efficacy and career development. Entrep. Theory Pract. 44, 878–908. doi: 10.1177/1042258719864293 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Caprara G. V., Alessandri G., Di-Giunta L., Panerai L., Eisenberg N. (2010). The contribution of agreeableness and self-efficacy beliefs to rosociality. Eur. J. Personal. 24, 36–55. doi: 10.1002/per.739, PMID: [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cardon M. S., Gregoire D. A., Stevens C. E., Patel P. C. (2013). Measuring entrepreneurial passion: conceptual foundations and scale validation. J. Bus. Ventur. 28, 373–396. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.03.003 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cardon M. S., Kirk C. P. (2013). Entrepreneurial passion as mediator of the self-efficacy to persistence relationship. Entrep. Theory Pract. 39, 1027–1050. doi: 10.1111/etap.12089 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cardon M. S., Stevens C. E. (2009). The Discriminant Validity of Entrepreneurial Passion. Briarcliff Manor, NY: Academy of Management. [Google Scholar]
  • Chen C. C., Greene P. G., Crick A. (1998). Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers? J. Bus. Ventur. 13, 295–316. doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(97)00029-3 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Chen S. C., Hsiao H. C., Chang J. C., Chou C. M., Chen C. P., Shen C. H. (2015). Can the entrepreneurship course improve the entrepreneurial intentions of students? Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 11, 557–569. doi: 10.1007/s11365-013-0293-0 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Chien-Chi C., Sun B., Yang H., Zheng M., Li B. (2020). Emotional competence, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial intention: a study based on China college students’ social entrepreneurship project. Front. Psychol. 11:547627. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.547627, PMID: [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Coco M., Guerrera C. S., Di Corrado D., Ramaci T., Maci T., Pellerone M., et al. (2019). Personality traits and athletic young adults. Sport Sci. Health 15, 435–441. doi: 10.1007/s11332-019-00551-3 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Coco M., Buscemi A., Sagone E., Pellerone M., Ramaci T., Marchese M., et al. (2020). Effects of Yoga Practice on personality, body image and lactate. Pilot study on a group of women from 40 years. Sustainability 12:6719. [Google Scholar]
  • Costa P. T., Jr., McCrae R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personal. Individ. Differ. 13, 653–665. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cristina P. M., Marinella C., Tiziana M., Chiara M., De Pasquale C., Gianluca D. O., et al. (2018). Successfully aging. Choice of life or life that choices. Acta Med. Austriaca 34, 107–111. [Google Scholar]
  • Cui J. (2021). The influence of entrepreneurial education and psychological capital on entrepreneurial behavior among college students. Front. Psychol. 12:755479. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.755479, PMID: [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cui J., Bell R. (2022). Behavioural entrepreneurial mindset: how entrepreneurial education activity impacts entrepreneurial intention and behaviour. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 20:100639. doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100639 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Darmanto S., Yuliari G. (2018). Mediating role of entrepreneurial self-efficacy in developing entrepreneurial behavior of entrepreneur students. Acad. Entrepr. J. 24, 1–14. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1265 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Daspit J. J., Fox C. J., Findley S. K. (2021). Entrepreneurial mindset: an integrated definition, a review of current insights, and directions for future research. J. Small Bus. Manag. 1, 1–33. doi: 10.1080/00472778.2021.1907583 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Davey T., Hannon P., Penaluna A. (2016). Entrepreneurship education and the role of universities in entrepreneurship: introduction to the special issue. Ind. High. Educ. 30, 171–182. doi: 10.1177/0950422216656699 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Davis H., Hall A., Mayer I. S. (2016). Developing a new measure of entrepreneurial mindset: reliability, validity, and implications for practitioners. Consult. Psychol. J. 68, 21–48. doi: 10.1037/cpb0000045 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • DeNoble A. F., Jung D., Ehrlich S. B. (1999a). “Entrepreneurial self efficacy the development of a measure and its relationship to entrepreneurial action,” in Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. eds. Reynolds P. D., Bygrave W. D., Carter N. M., Manigart S., Mason C., Meyer G. D., et al. (Wellesley, MA: Babson College; ), 73–87. [Google Scholar]
  • DeNoble A. F., Jung D., Ehrlich S. B. (1999b). “Initiating new ventures: the role of entrepreneurial self-efficacy”, in Babson Research Conference, Wellesley, MA: Babson College.
  • Dieter B., Uwe F. (2011). Entrepreneurial diversity: theoretische und empirische beleuchtungen der heterogenität beruflicher selbständigkeit in Deutschland. ZfKE–Zeitschrift für KMU und Entrepreneurship 59, 251–272. doi: 10.3790/zfke.59.4.251 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dissanayake D. M. N. S. W. (2013). The impact of perceived desirability and perceived feasibility on entrepreneurial intention among undergraduate students in Sri Lanka: an extended model. Kelaniya J. Manag. 2, 39–57. doi: 10.4038/kjm.v2i1.6543 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Djigić G., Stojiljković S., Dosković M. (2014). Basic personality dimensions and teachers’ self-efficacy. Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci. 112, 593–602. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1206 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Donaldson, Campbell B. C. (2019). Social psychology for program and policy evaluation. Guilford Press, 74–100. [Google Scholar]
  • Duong C. D. (2021). Big five personality traits and green consumption: bridging the attitude-intention-behavior gap. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. doi: 10.1108/APJML-04-2021-0276 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Eisenhardt K. M., Schoonhoven C. B. (1990). Organizational growth: linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among US semiconductor ventures, 1978–1988. Adm. Sci. Q. 35, 504–529. doi: 10.2307/2393315 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Elnadi M., Gheith M. H. (2021). Entrepreneurial ecosystem, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial intention in higher education: evidence from Saudi Arabia. The International Journal of Management Education 19:100458. doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100458 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fai E. K., Anderson C., Ferreros V. (2017). Role of attitudes and intentions in predicting adherence to oral diabetes medications. Endocr. Connect. 6, 63–70. doi: 10.1530/EC-16-0093, PMID: [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Feng B., Chen M. (2020). The impact of entrepreneurial passion on psychology and behavior of entrepreneurs. Front. Psychol. 11:1733. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01733, PMID: [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ferreira J. J., Raposo M. L., Rodrigues R. G., Dinis A., Do Paço A. (2012). A model of entrepreneurial intention: an application of the psychological and behavioral approaches. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 19, 424–440. doi: 10.1108/14626001211250144 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fitzsimmons J. R., Douglas E. J. (2011). Interaction between feasibility and desirability in the formation of entrepreneurial intentions. J. Bus. Ventur. 26, 431–440. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.01.001 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fornell C. G., Larcker D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation modelswith unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 18, 39–50. doi: 10.1177/002224378101800104 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Frese M., Gielnik M. M. (2014). The psychology of entrepreneurship. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 1, 413–438. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091326 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Goldberg L. R. (1990). An alternative description of personality: the big-five factor structure. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 59, 1216–1229. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216, PMID: [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gorman G., Hanlon D., King W. (1997). Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education, enterprise education and education for small business management: a ten-year literature review. Int. Small Bus. J. 15, 56–77. doi: 10.1177/0266242697153004 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gosling S. D., Rentfrow P. J., Swann W. B., Jr. (2003). A very brief measure of the big five personality domains. J. Res. Pers. 37, 504–528. doi: 10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hahn E. D., Ang S. H. (2017). From the editors: new directions in the reporting of statistical results in the journal of world business. J. World Bus. 52, 125–126. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2016.12.003 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hair J. F., Hult G. T. M., Ringle C. M., Sarstedt M. (2014). Aprimer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE. [Google Scholar]
  • Hair J. F., Hult G. T. M., Ringle C. M., Sarstedt M. (2016). Aprimer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  • Hair J. F., Risher J. J., Sarstedt M., Ringle C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 31, 2–24. doi: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hair J. F., Sarstedt M., Pieper T. M., Ringle C. M. (2012). The use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in strategic management research: a review of past practices and recommendations for future applications. Long Range Plan. 45, 320–340. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2012.09.008 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hallak R., Lindsay N. J., Brown G. (2011). Examining the role of entrepreneurial experience and entrepreneurial self-efficacy on SMTE performance. Tour. Anal. 16, 583–599. doi: 10.3727/108354211X13202764960744 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hamza M. A., Rehman S., Sarwar A., Choudhary K. N. (2021). Is knowledge a tenement? The mediating role of team member exchange over the relationship of big five personality traits and knowledge-hiding behavior. VINE J. Informat. Knowledge Manag. Syst. doi: 10.1108/VJIKMS-05-2020-0084 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Handayati P., Wulandari D., Soetjipto B. E., Wibowo A. (2020). Does entrepreneurship education promote vocational students’ entrepreneurial mindset? Heliyon 6, e05426–e05427. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05426 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hassan A., Saleem I., Anwar I., Hussain S. A. (2020). Entrepreneurial intention of Indian university students: the role of opportunity recognition and entrepreneurship education. Educ. Train. 62, 843–861. doi: 10.1108/ET-02-2020-0033 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hayes A. F. (2013). PROCESS SPSS macro: computer, software and manual. Available at: http://afhayes.com/introduction-to-mediationmoderationand-conditional-processanalysis
  • Haynie J. M., Shepherd D., Mosakowski E., Earley P. C. (2010). A situated metacognitive model of the entrepreneurial mindset. J. Bus. Ventur. 25, 217–229. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.10.001 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Henley A., Contreras F., Espinosa J. C., Barbosa D. (2017). Entrepreneurial intentions of Colombian business students: planned behaviour, leadership skills and social capital. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 23, 1017–1032. doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-01-2017-0031 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hisrich R. D. (1992). The need for marketing in entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 7, 53–57. doi: 10.1108/08858629210035427 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hisrich R. D., Ramadani V. (2017). Effective entrepreneurial management. Effective Entrepreneurial. Management. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-50467-4 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hossain M. U., Arefin M. S., Yukongdi V. (2021). Personality traits, social self-efficacy, social support, and social entrepreneurial intention: the moderating role of gender. J. Soc. Entrepr. 1, 1–21. doi: 10.1080/19420676.2021.1936614 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hsu D. K., Wiklund J., Cotton R. D. (2017). Success, failure, and entrepreneurial reentry: an experimental assessment of the veracity of self-efficacy and prospect theory. Entrep. Theory Pract. 41, 19–47. doi: 10.1111/etap.12166 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hu M. L. (2008). A study of the personality traits, environment and entrepreneurial attitude of technical institute’s hospitality management students. J. Hosp. Home Econ 5, 349–375. doi: 10.1080/23311975.2020.1801217 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hua J., Zhang G., Coco C., Zhao T., Hou N. (2020). Proactive personality and cross-cultural adjustment: the mediating role of adjustment self-efficacy. J. Int. Stud. 10, 817–835. doi: 10.32674/jis.v10i4.1274 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Huang L., Huang Y., Huang R., Xie G., Cai W. (2022). Factors influencing returning migrants’ entrepreneurship intentions for rural E-commerce: an empirical investigation in China. Sustainability 14:3682. doi: 10.3390/su14063682 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Huang L., Xie G., Huang R., Li G., Cai W., Apostolidis C. (2021). Electronic commerce for sustainable rural development: exploring the factors influencing BoPs’ entrepreneurial intention. Sustainability 13:10604. doi: 10.3390/su131910604 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jiatong W., Murad M., Bajun F., Tufail M. S., Mirza F., Rafiq M. (2021). Impact of entrepreneurial education, mindset, and creativity on entrepreneurial intention: mediating role of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Front. Psychol. 12:724440. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.724440 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Judge T. A., Jackson C. L., Shaw J. C., Scott B. A., Rich B. L. (2007). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: the integral role of individual differences. J. Appl. Psychol. 92, 107–127. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.107, PMID: [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Karyaningsih R. P. D., Wibowo A., Saptono A., Narmaditya B. S. (2020). Does entrepreneurial knowledge influence vocational students’ intention? Lessons from Indonesia. Entrepreneurial Bus. Econ. Rev. 8, 138–155. doi: 10.15678/EBER.2020.080408 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Katz C. (2003). The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education. J. Bus. Ventur. 18, 283–300. doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00098-8 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kautonen T., van Gelderen M., Fink M. (2015). Robustness of teh theory of planned behaviour in predicting entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrep. Theory Pract. 39, 655–674. doi: 10.1111/etap.12056 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kim P. H., Aldrich H. E. (2005). Social capital and entrepreneurship. Found. Trends Entrep. 1, 55–104. doi: 10.1561/0300000002 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kock N., Gaskins L. (2014). The mediating role of voice and accountability in the relationship between Internet diffusion and government corruption in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa. Inf. Technol. Dev. 20, 23–43. doi: 10.1080/02681102.2013.832129 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kock N., Lynn G. S. (2012). Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-based SEM: an illustration and recommendations. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 13, 546–580. doi: 10.17705/1jais.00302 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kong F., Zhao L., Tsai C.-H. (2020). The relationship between entrepreneurial intention and action: the effects of fear of failure and role model. Front. Psychol. 11:229. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00229, PMID: [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Krueger N. F., Jr., Carsrud A. (1993). Entrepreneurial intentions: applying the theory of planned behaviour. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 5, 315–330. doi: 10.1080/08985629300000020 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Krueger N. F., Jr., Reilly M. D., Carsrud A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. J. Bus. Ventur. 15, 411–432. doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00033-0 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kuckertz A., Wagner M. (2010). The influence of sustainability orientation on entrepreneurial intentions: investigating teh role of business experience. J. Bus. Ventur. 25, 524–539. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.09.001 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kuratko D. F. (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and challenges. Entrep. Theory Pract. 29, 577–597. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00099.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kuratko D. F., Fisher G., Audretsch D. B. (2021). Unraveling the entrepreneurial mindset. Small Bus. Econ. 57, 1681–1691. doi: 10.1007/s11187-020-00372-6 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Laouiti R., Haddoud M. Y., Nakara W. A., Onjewu A. K. E. (2022). A gender-based approach to the influence of personality traits on entrepreneurial intention. J. Bus. Res. 142, 819–829. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.018 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Laviolette M., Lefebvre M. R., Brunel O. (2012). The impact of story bound entrepreneurial role models on self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 18, 720–742. doi: 10.1108/13552551211268148 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lee Y., Herrmann P. (2021). Entrepreneurial passion: a systematic review and research opportunities. J. Small Bus. Strateg. 31, 122–147. doi: 10.53703/001c.29740 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lee-Ross D. (2017). An examination of the entrepreneurial intent of MBA students in Australia using the entrepreneurial intention questionnaire. J. Manag. Dev. 36, 1180–1190. doi: 10.1108/JMD-10-2016-0200 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Liang C., Chang C. C., Hsu Y. (2013). Personality and psychological factors predict imagination: evidence from Taiwan. Learn. Individ. Differ. 27, 67–74. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.06.010 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Liao Y. K., Nguyen V. H. A., Chi H. K., Nguyen H. H. (2022). Unraveling the direct and indirect effects of entrepreneurial education and mindset on entrepreneurial intention: the moderating role of entrepreneurial passion. Glob. Bus. Organ. Excell. [Google Scholar]
  • Liñán F. (2004). Intention-based models of entrepreneurship education. Piccolla Impresa/Small Business 3, 11–35. [Google Scholar]
  • Liñán F. (2008). Skill and value perceptions: how do they affect entrepreneurial intentions? Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 4, 257–272. doi: 10.1007/s11365-008-0093-0 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Liñán F., Chen Y.-W. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Enterp. Theory Pract. 33, 593–617. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00318.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Liñán F., Urbano D., Guerrero M. (2011). Regional variations in entrepreneurial cognitions: start-up intentions of university students in Spain. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 23, 187–215. doi: 10.1080/08985620903233929 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Luthje C., Franke N. (2003). The 'making' of an entrepreneur: testing a model of entrepreneurial intent among engineering students at MIT. R&D Manag. 33, 135–147. doi: 10.1111/1467-9310.00288 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Maes J., Leroy H., Sels L. (2014). Gender differences in entrepreneurial intentions: a TPB multi-group analysis at factor and indicator level. Eur. Manag. J. 32, 784–794. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2014.01.001 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Marcionetti J., Rossier J. (2016). Global life satisfaction in adolescence: the role of personality traits, self-esteem, and self-efficacy. J. Individ. Differ. 37, 135–144. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000198 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • McClelland D. (1961). The Achieving Society. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand. [Google Scholar]
  • McGee J. E., Peterson M. (2017). The long-term impact of entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial orientation on venture performance. J. Small Bus. Manag. 57, 720–737. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12324 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • McGee J. E., Peterson M., Mueller S. L., Sequeira J. M. (2009). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: refining the measure. Enterp. Theory Pract. 33, 965–988. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00304.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • McGrath R. G., MacMillan I. C. (2000). The Entrepreneurial Mindset: Strategies for Continuously Creating Opportunity in an Age of Uncertainty. Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. [Google Scholar]
  • McMullen J. S., Kier A. S. (2016). Trapped by the entrepreneurial mindset: opportunity seeking and escalation of commitment in the Mount Everest disaster. J. Bus. Ventur. 31, 663–686. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.09.003 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Montiel-Campos H. (2021). Entrepreneurial alertness, innovation modes, and business models in small-and medium-sized enterprises: an exploratory quantitative study. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 16, 23–30. doi: 10.4067/S0718-27242021000100023 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mukhtar S., Wardana L. W., Wibowo A., Narmaditya B. S. (2021). Does entrepreneurship education and culture promote students’ entrepreneurial intention? The mediating role of entrepreneurial mindset. Cogent Educ. 8:1918849. doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2021.1918849 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Nabi G., Liñán F., Fayolle A., Krueger N., Walmsley A. (2017). The impact of entrepreneurship education in higher education: a systematic review and research agenda. Acad. Manag. Learn. Edu. 16, 277–299. doi: 10.5465/amle.2015.0026 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Naumann C. (2017). Entrepreneurial mindset: a synthetic literature review. Entrepreneur. Bus. Econ. Rev. 5, 149–172. doi: 10.15678/EBER.2017.050308 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Naushad M. (2018). A study on the antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions among Saudi students. Entrep, Sustain. Issues 5, 600–617. doi: 10.9770/jesi.2018.5.3(14) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Neneh B. N. (2020). Entrepreneurial passion and entrepreneurial intention: the role of social support and entrepreneurial selfefficacy. Stud. High. Educ. 1, 1–17. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2020.1770716 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Newman A., Obschonka M., Moeller J., Chandan G. G. (2021). Entrepreneurial passion: a review, synthesis, and agenda for future research. Appl. Psychol. 70, 816–860. doi: 10.1111/apps.12236 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ngek N. B. (2015). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and small business performance: the mediating effect of entrepreneurialmindset and openness to experience. Probl. Perspect. Manag. 13, 271–280. [Google Scholar]
  • Oyugi J. L. (2015). The mediating effect of self-efficacy on the relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial intentions of university. J. Entrep. Manag. Innovat. 11, 31–56. doi: 10.7341/20151122 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Palmer C., Fasbender U., Kraus S., Birkner S., Kailer N. (2021). A chip off the old block? The role of dominance and parental entrepreneurship for entrepreneurial intention. Rev. Manag. Sci. 15, 287–307. doi: 10.1007/s11846-019-00342-7 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pelegrini G. C., de Moraes G. H. S. M. (2021). Does gender matter? A university ecosystem, self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention analysis in Brazilian universities. Gend. Manag. [Google Scholar]
  • Peterman N. E., Kennedy J. (2003). Enterprise education: influencing students’ perceptions of entrepreneurship. Entrep. Theory Pract. 28, 129–144. doi: 10.1046/j.1540-6520.2003.00035.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pidduck R. J., Clark D. R., Lumpkin G. T. (2021). Entrepreneurial mindset: dispositional beliefs, opportunity beliefs, and entrepreneurial behavior. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2, 1–35. doi: 10.1080/00472778.2021.1907582 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Podsakoff P. M., Mackenzie S. B., Lee J. Y. (2003). Common method biases in Behavioural research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 879–903. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879, PMID: [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Prodan I., Drnovsek M. (2010). Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurial intentions: an empirical test. Technovation 30, 332–347. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2010.02.002 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Rauch A., Frese M. (2007). let's put the person back into entrepreneurship research: a meta analysis on teh research between business owners' personality traits, business creation and success. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psy. 16, 353–385. doi: 10.1080/13594320701595438 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Rideout E. C., Gray D. O. (2013). Does entrepreneurship education really work? A review and methodological critique of the empirical literature on the effects of university-based entrepreneurship education. J. Small Bus. Manag. 51, 329–351. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12021 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Robinson P. B., Sexton E. A. (1994). The effect of education and experience on self-employment success. J. Bus. Ventur. 9, 141–156. doi: 10.1016/0883-9026(94)90006-X [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Roeslie S. H., Arianto R. F. (2022). Impact of entrepreneurial culture, entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurial mindset, on entrepreneurial intention. Budapest Int. Res. Crit. Inst. 5, 12581–12594. doi: 10.33258/birci.v5i2.5101 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ryan T. R. (1970). Intentional Behavior: An Approach to Human Motivation. New York, NY: The Ronald Press Company. [Google Scholar]
  • Şahin F., Karadağ H., Tuncer B. (2019). Big five personality traits, entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention: a configurational approach. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 25, 1188–1211. doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-07-2018-0466 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sanchez-Cardona I., Rodriguez-Montalbán R., Acevedo-Soto E., Lugo K. N., Torres-Oquendo F., Toro-Alfonso J. (2012). Self-efficacy and openness to experience as antecedent of study engagement: an exploratory analysis. Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci. 46, 2163–2167. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.446 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Scherer R., Adams J., Carley S., Wiebe F. (1989). Role model performance effects on development of entrepreneurial career preference. Entrep. Theory Pract. 13, 53–72. doi: 10.1177/104225878901300306 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Schmitt N. (2007). The interaction of neuroticism and gender and its impact on self-efficacy and performance. Hum. Perform. 21, 49–61. doi: 10.1080/08959280701522197 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Schneider B., Smith D. B., Goldstein H. W. (2000). Attraction–Selection–Attrition: Toward a Person–Environment Psychology of Organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  • Schumpeter J. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Schwarz E. J., Wdowiak M. A., Almer-Jarz D. A., Breitenecker R. J. (2009). The effects of attitudes and perceived environment conditions on students’ entrepreneurial intent. Educ. Train. 51, 272–291. doi: 10.1108/00400910910964566 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Shah I. A., Amjed S., Jaboob S. (2020). The moderating role of entrepreneurship education in shaping entrepreneurial intentions. J. Econ. Struct. 9:19. doi: 10.1186/s40008-020-00195-4 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Shahab Y., Chengang Y., Arbizu A. D., Haider M. J. (2018). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and intention: do entrepreneurial creativity and education matter? Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 25, 259–280. doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-12-2017-0522 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Shane S. A. (2003). A general theory of entrepreneurship: the individual-opportunity nexus. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  • Shane S., Cable D. (2002). Network ties, reputation, and the financing of new ventures. Manag. Sci. 48, 364–381. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.48.3.364.7731 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Solesvik M. Z., Westhead P., Matlay H., Parsyak V. N. (2013). Entrepreneurial assets and mindsets: benefit from university entrepreneurship education investment. Educ. Train. 55, 748–762. doi: 10.1108/ET-06-2013-0075 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Souitaris V., Zerbinati S., Al-Laham A. (2007). Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources. J. Bus. Ventur. 22, 566–591. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.05.002 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Srivastava A., Dasgupta S. A., Ray A., Bala P. K., Chakraborty S. (2021). Relationships between the “Big Five” personality types and consumer attitudes in Indian students toward augmented reality advertising. Aslib J. Inf. Manag 73, 967–991. doi: 10.1108/AJIM-02-2021-0046 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Stajkovic A. D., Bandura A., Locke E. A., Lee D., Sergent K. (2018). Test of three conceptual models of influence of the big five personality traits and self-efficacy on academic performance: a meta-analytic path-analysis. Personal. Individ. Differ. 120, 238–245. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2017.08.014 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Tehseen S., Haider S. A. (2021). Impact of universities’ partnerships on students’ sustainable entrepreneurship intentions: a comparative study. Sustainability 13:5025. doi: 10.3390/su13095025 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Thompson E. R. (2009). Individual entrepreneurial intent: construct clarification and development of an internationally reliable metric. Entrep. Theory Pract. 33, 669–694. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00321.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Urbano D., Aparicio S., Guerrero M., Noguera M., Torrent-Sellens J. (2017). Institutional determinants of student employer entrepreneurs at Catalan universities. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 123, 271–282. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.021 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Utami C. W. (2017). Attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavior, entrepreneurship education and self-efficacy toward entrepreneurial intention university student in Indonesia. Eur. Res. Stud. J. 20, 475–495. [Google Scholar]
  • Walter S. G., Block J. H. (2016). Outcomes of entrepreneurship education: an institutional perspective. J. Bus. Ventur. 31, 216–233. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.10.003 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wang J. H., Chang C. C., Yao S. N., Liang C. (2016). The contribution of self-efficacy to the relationship between personality traits and entrepreneurial intention. High. Educ. 72, 209–224. doi: 10.1007/s10734-015-9946-y [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wardana L. W., Narmaditya B. S., Wibowo A., Mahendra A. M., Wibowo N. A., Harwida G., et al. (2020). The impact of entrepreneurship education and students’ entrepreneurial mindset: the mediating role of attitude and self-efficacy. Heliyon 6:e04922. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04922, PMID: [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Westhead P., Solesvik M. Z. (2016). Entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial intention: do female students benefit? Int. Small Bus. J. 34, 979–1003. doi: 10.1177/0266242615612534 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wilson K., Kickul J., Marlino D. (2007). Gender, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: implications for entrepreneurship education. Entrep. Theory Pract. 31, 387–406. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00179.x [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wooten K. C., Timmerman T. A., Folger R. (1999). The use of personality and the five-factor model to predict new business ventures: from outplacement to start-up. J. Vocat. Behav. 54, 82–101. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1998.1654 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Xie G., Huang L., Apostolidis C., Huang Z., Cai W., Li G. (2021). Assessing consumer preference for overpackaging solutions in e-commerce. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18:7951. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18157951, PMID: [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Yamina G., Mohammed B. S. (2019). Factors affecting students’ entrepreneurial intentions in Algeria: application of Shapero and Sokol model. Am. J. Econ. 9, 273–281. doi: 10.5923/j.economics.20190906.01 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Yasir N., Mahmood N., Mehmood H. S., Rashid O., Liren A. (2021). The integrated role of personal values and theory of planned behavior to form a sustainable entrepreneurial intention. Sustainability 13:9249. doi: 10.3390/su13169249 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Yousaf U., Ali S. A., Ahmed M., Usman B., Sameer I. (2021). From entrepreneurial education to entrepreneurial intention: a sequential mediation of self-efficacy and entrepreneurial attitude. Int. J. Innovat. Sci. 13, 364–380. doi: 10.1108/IJIS-09-2020-0133 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Zhang Y., Duysters G., Cloodt M. (2014). The role of entrepreneurship education as a predictor of university students’ entrepreneurial intention. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 10, 623–641. doi: 10.1007/s11365-012-0246-z [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Zhao H., Seibert S. E. (2006). The big five personality dimensions and entrepreneurial status: a meta-analytical review. J. Appl. Psychol. 91, 259–271. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.259, PMID: [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Zhao H., Seibert S. E., Lumpkin G. T. (2010). The relationship of personality to entrepreneurial intentions and performance: a meta-analytic review

    What are the 11 characteristics of successful entrepreneurs?

    11 qualities that make a true entrepreneur.
    Self-starting. This may seem obvious but an entrepreneur can't sit around waiting for someone else to give them permission to do something. ... .
    Disciplined. ... .
    Confident. ... .
    Creative. ... .
    Risk-taking. ... .
    Relationship-building. ... .
    Open-minded. ... .
    Planners..

    What are the characteristics of entrepreneurial mindset?

    What Is the Entrepreneurial Mindset?.
    Determination. The refusal to fear failure keeps entrepreneurs going. ... .
    Focus. Entrepreneurs rarely allow distractions to take their minds off matters at hand. ... .
    Drive. ... .
    Decisiveness. ... .
    Independence. ... .
    Authenticity. ... .
    Flexibility. ... .
    A Thirst for Knowledge..

    What are the 12 characteristics of successful entrepreneurs PDF?

    The 12 Characteristics of Successful Entrepreneurs.
    They take what they do seriously. ... .
    They make it all about the customer. ... .
    They make the big decisions carefully. ... .
    They aren't scared of the road less traveled. ... .
    They harness technology. ... .
    They invest in themselves. ... .
    They are constantly learning. ... .
    They're not afraid of risks..

    What are the 17 characteristics of an entrepreneur?

    17 Traits That Entrepreneurs Possess.
    You're motivated by fear. ... .
    You hate being told no. ... .
    You thrive on uncertainty. ... .
    You're willing to take responsibility. ... .
    You're committed to your business with your heart and soul..
    You're passionate. ... .
    You understand that you're not defined by your job, because you can see the big picture..