Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 14 – uploaded by Zsuzsanna Horváth

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 6.2. r° analysis of the Entrepreneurial Calling 2015 Model. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling, VOCSE = Vocational self. efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, IDENT = entrepreneurial identity, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations, FLOU = flourishing

Figure 6 2. r° analysis of the Entrepreneurial Calling 2015 Model. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling, VOCSE = Vocational self. efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, IDENT = entrepreneurial identity, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations, FLOU = flourishing

Related Figures (84)

A measurement guide. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 12-35. Sage Publications.
A measurement guide. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 12-35. Sage Publications.
Table 2.1 2.4.3 Active citizenship and community involvement of entrepreneurs. their occupation, will empower individuals to find their psychological well-being.
Table 2.1 2.4.3 Active citizenship and community involvement of entrepreneurs. their occupation, will empower individuals to find their psychological well-being.
process through the psychology lens, there is a scarcity of meta-analyses providing an overview
process through the psychology lens, there is a scarcity of meta-analyses providing an overview
can be external or internal. Figure 2.2 depicts the career choice module of the model. A measurement guide. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 12-35. Sage Publications.
can be external or internal. Figure 2.2 depicts the career choice module of the model. A measurement guide. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 12-35. Sage Publications.
experience and the social relations that Comparison of Research Paradigms structure these experiences Table 3.1 Note: Adapted from: “Business research methods” by A. Bryman and E. Bell, 2007. (2nd ed.). New York Oxford University Press Inc.
experience and the social relations that Comparison of Research Paradigms structure these experiences Table 3.1 Note: Adapted from: “Business research methods” by A. Bryman and E. Bell, 2007. (2nd ed.). New York Oxford University Press Inc.
Rules of Thumb for Selecting CB-SEM or PLS-SEM
Rules of Thumb for Selecting CB-SEM or PLS-SEM
Minimum Sample Size Requirements Based on Statistical Power
Minimum Sample Size Requirements Based on Statistical Power
Number of Constructs, Variables, Sample Sizes and Significance Levels in Studies 1, 2 and 3 3.5.7 Recent advances in the PLS-SEM application. research and practice and entry into other social sciences domains such as vocational
Number of Constructs, Variables, Sample Sizes and Significance Levels in Studies 1, 2 and 3 3.5.7 Recent advances in the PLS-SEM application. research and practice and entry into other social sciences domains such as vocational
excellence in one's domain of expertise” (TEFI White Paper 2008, p.16). involves taking the initiative to address problems in one's service domain and a commitment to 4.3 Original Research Questions for Study 1
excellence in one's domain of expertise” (TEFI White Paper 2008, p.16). involves taking the initiative to address problems in one's service domain and a commitment to 4.3 Original Research Questions for Study 1
Qualities
Qualities
Factor Loading of the Items of the Constructs of the Student Entrepreneurial Intent Model significant (all p < .001), ranging from .554 to .901.
Factor Loading of the Items of the Constructs of the Student Entrepreneurial Intent Model significant (all p < .001), ranging from .554 to .901.
llowed for the diagnostics of the reliability and validity of the reflective construct measures.
llowed for the diagnostics of the reliability and validity of the reflective construct measures.
Note. Factor loadings > .55 are in boldface. PEQ’s = Prototypical Entrepreneurial Qualities
Note. Factor loadings > .55 are in boldface. PEQ’s = Prototypical Entrepreneurial Qualities
Note. PEQ’s = Prototypical Entrepreneurial Qualities. AVE = Average variance extracted. Reliability Indicators of the Model construct, was above the threshold value of .5 (Hair et al., 2006). in the proximity of .60 are accepted, if the values of other reliability indicators justify it (Hau
Note. PEQ’s = Prototypical Entrepreneurial Qualities. AVE = Average variance extracted. Reliability Indicators of the Model construct, was above the threshold value of .5 (Hair et al., 2006). in the proximity of .60 are accepted, if the values of other reliability indicators justify it (Hau
Discriminant Validity of the Model Using the Fornell-Larcker Criterion Table 4.4
Discriminant Validity of the Model Using the Fornell-Larcker Criterion Table 4.4
Note. PEQ’s = Prototypical Entrepreneurial Qualities. Indicators of Validation of the Structural Model
Note. PEQ’s = Prototypical Entrepreneurial Qualities. Indicators of Validation of the Structural Model
Note. PEQ’s = Prototypical Entrepreneurial Qualities; *** < .001 Inner (Endogenous) Path Analysis and Statistical Significance Table 4.6 Table 4.7
Note. PEQ’s = Prototypical Entrepreneurial Qualities; *** < .001 Inner (Endogenous) Path Analysis and Statistical Significance Table 4.6 Table 4.7
Figure 5.1. Study 2 Conceptual model. OE = Outcome expectations. engagement, and (c) a high level of career confidence” (Hirschi, 2011, p. 71).
Figure 5.1. Study 2 Conceptual model. OE = Outcome expectations. engagement, and (c) a high level of career confidence” (Hirschi, 2011, p. 71).
Note. Factor loadings > .55 are in boldface. ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations.
Note. Factor loadings > .55 are in boldface. ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations.
Figure 5.2. Step 1 Measurement model with path coefficients. Model represents construct °s, item loadings onto the constructs as well as the predictive paths between the constructs.
Figure 5.2. Step 1 Measurement model with path coefficients. Model represents construct °s, item loadings onto the constructs as well as the predictive paths between the constructs.
Reliability Indicators of the Model Table 5.3
Reliability Indicators of the Model Table 5.3
Discriminant Validity of the Model Using the Fornell-Larcker Criterion The standardized path coefficients shown in Table 5.5 enable jdgements on the relative Table 5.4 importance of relationships in the model. A common bootstrapping routine was used to significant estimates. Internal consistency displayed suggested minimum levels ( a > .65; Hair
Discriminant Validity of the Model Using the Fornell-Larcker Criterion The standardized path coefficients shown in Table 5.5 enable jdgements on the relative Table 5.4 importance of relationships in the model. A common bootstrapping routine was used to significant estimates. Internal consistency displayed suggested minimum levels ( a > .65; Hair
Step I Inner Model Path Coefficients and their Statistical Significance Table 5.5
Step I Inner Model Path Coefficients and their Statistical Significance Table 5.5
ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations.
ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations.
Note. *** p < .001. ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations. Bootstrapped Total Effects and Mediation Analysis Table 5.7
Note. *** p < .001. ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations. Bootstrapped Total Effects and Mediation Analysis Table 5.7
Step 2 Item Cross-loadings
Step 2 Item Cross-loadings
Figure 5.3. Step 2 Measurement model with path coefficients and exogenous item loadings.
Figure 5.3. Step 2 Measurement model with path coefficients and exogenous item loadings.
Note. Factor loadings > .55 are in boldface. CALL = calling, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT interest, OE = outcome expectations.
Note. Factor loadings > .55 are in boldface. CALL = calling, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT interest, OE = outcome expectations.
The above model can be simplified into the following model: icance. *p < .10; ***p < .01 (two-tailed test). OE = outcome expectations.
The above model can be simplified into the following model: icance. *p < .10; ***p < .01 (two-tailed test). OE = outcome expectations.
Reliability Indicators of the Model 2 Note. AVE = Average variance extracted.
Reliability Indicators of the Model 2 Note. AVE = Average variance extracted.
Note. CALL = calling, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations. Discriminant Validity of the Model Using the Fornell-Larcker Criterion Stone-Geisser's Q? value (Geisser, 1974; Stone, 1974) has been applied to further diagn edictive accuracy (Table 5.11). “Q? values larger than 0 suggest that the model has predict levance for a certain endogenous construct. In contrast, values of 0 and below indicate a | ‘predictive relevance” (Hair Jr et al., 2013). “The cross-validated redundancy approach bu. 1 the path model estimates of both the structural model (scores of the antecedent constru 1d the measurement model (target endogenous construct) of data prediction. Theref ‘ediction by means of cross-validated redundancy fits the PLS-SEM approach perfec Hair Jr et al., 2013).
Note. CALL = calling, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations. Discriminant Validity of the Model Using the Fornell-Larcker Criterion Stone-Geisser's Q? value (Geisser, 1974; Stone, 1974) has been applied to further diagn edictive accuracy (Table 5.11). “Q? values larger than 0 suggest that the model has predict levance for a certain endogenous construct. In contrast, values of 0 and below indicate a | ‘predictive relevance” (Hair Jr et al., 2013). “The cross-validated redundancy approach bu. 1 the path model estimates of both the structural model (scores of the antecedent constru 1d the measurement model (target endogenous construct) of data prediction. Theref ‘ediction by means of cross-validated redundancy fits the PLS-SEM approach perfec Hair Jr et al., 2013).
Indicators of Validation of the Structural Model
Indicators of Validation of the Structural Model
Note. CALL = calling, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations. Step 2 Exogenous Construct f° Effect Sizes and their Magnitude Table 5.12 demonstrates f° effect sizes.
Note. CALL = calling, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations. Step 2 Exogenous Construct f° Effect Sizes and their Magnitude Table 5.12 demonstrates f° effect sizes.
Table 5.13
Table 5.13
Composition of the Academic Disciplines of the Sample Table 6.4
Composition of the Academic Disciplines of the Sample Table 6.4
Study 3 Scales with Source and Internal Consistency Measures
Study 3 Scales with Source and Internal Consistency Measures
What is your highest level of completed education? If student, which year are you in?
What is your highest level of completed education? If student, which year are you in?
Figure 6.5. Average Variance Extracted analysis of the Entrepreneurial Calling 2015 Model. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling VOCSE = Vocational self-efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, IDENT = entrepreneurial identity, INT = interest, OE = outcom expectations, FLOU = flourishing.
Figure 6.5. Average Variance Extracted analysis of the Entrepreneurial Calling 2015 Model. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling VOCSE = Vocational self-efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, IDENT = entrepreneurial identity, INT = interest, OE = outcom expectations, FLOU = flourishing.
Discriminant Validity of the Model Using the Fornell-Larcker Criterion Table 6.6 6.4.2 Structural model.
Discriminant Validity of the Model Using the Fornell-Larcker Criterion Table 6.6 6.4.2 Structural model.
Bootstrapping Procedure for the Entrepreneurial Calling 2015 Model Table 6.7
Bootstrapping Procedure for the Entrepreneurial Calling 2015 Model Table 6.7
Figure 6.7. Global Structural Model of Entrepreneurial Calling 2015 complete with path coefficients, path significance and r’ values. Density of the path correlations reflect relative strength for visual presentation. *** p < .01; ** p < .05; * p < .10. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling, VOCSE = Vocational self-efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, IDENT = entrepreneurial identity, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations, FLOU = flourishing
Figure 6.7. Global Structural Model of Entrepreneurial Calling 2015 complete with path coefficients, path significance and r’ values. Density of the path correlations reflect relative strength for visual presentation. *** p < .01; ** p < .05; * p < .10. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling, VOCSE = Vocational self-efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, IDENT = entrepreneurial identity, INT = interest, OE = outcome expectations, FLOU = flourishing
Figure 6.8. Global Model without ACTCIT. Density of the path correlations reflect relative 6.4.3.1 Version 1: The construct of ACTCIT absent. When compared to the global model, the decomposed model demonstrates that ACTCIT
Figure 6.8. Global Model without ACTCIT. Density of the path correlations reflect relative 6.4.3.1 Version 1: The construct of ACTCIT absent. When compared to the global model, the decomposed model demonstrates that ACTCIT
difference of group-specific path coefficients”.
difference of group-specific path coefficients”.
Note. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling, VOCSE = Vocational self-efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial
Note. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling, VOCSE = Vocational self-efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial
PLS-MGA Bootstrapping Results for Total Effects
PLS-MGA Bootstrapping Results for Total Effects
Note. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling, VOCSE = Vocational self-efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, IDENT = entrepreneurial identity, INT = interest. OE = outcome expectations, FLOU = flourishing. “" p < .01; ™ p < .05; “ p < .10.
Note. ACTCIT = active citizenship, CALL = calling, VOCSE = Vocational self-efficacy, ESE = entrepreneurial self-efficacy, IDENT = entrepreneurial identity, INT = interest. OE = outcome expectations, FLOU = flourishing. “" p < .01; ™ p < .05; “ p < .10.
STARTUP, it has become ESE in the NOSTARTUP.
STARTUP, it has become ESE in the NOSTARTUP.
Figure 6.17. Indicator IPM of the STARTUP sub-sample for FLOU. ACTCIT = active
Figure 6.17. Indicator IPM of the STARTUP sub-sample for FLOU. ACTCIT = active
of tourism and hospitality undergraduates. Thank you for
of tourism and hospitality undergraduates. Thank you for
The USQ Human Research Ethics Committee has recently reviewed your responses to the conditions placed upon the ethical approval for the project outlined below. Your proposal is now deemed to meet the requirements of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2007) and full ethical approval has been granted. The standard conditions of this approval are:
The USQ Human Research Ethics Committee has recently reviewed your responses to the conditions placed upon the ethical approval for the project outlined below. Your proposal is now deemed to meet the requirements of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2007) and full ethical approval has been granted. The standard conditions of this approval are:
Related topics:
EntrepreneurshipPsychologySocial PsychologyPolitical Science
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved