The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Big Five personality dimensions and entrepreneurial status: A meta-analytical review.
Abstract
In this study, the authors used meta-analytical techniques to examine the relationship between personality and entrepreneurial status. Personality variables used in previous studies were categorized according to the five-factor model of personality. Results indicate significant differences between entrepreneurs and managers on 4 personality dimensions such that entrepreneurs scored higher on Conscientiousness and Openness to Experience and lower on Neuroticism and Agreeableness. No difference was found for Extraversion. Effect sizes for each personality dimension were small, although the multivariate relationship for the full set of personality variables was moderate (R = .37). Considerable heterogeneity existed for all of the personality variables except Agreeableness, suggesting that future research should explore possible moderators of the personality-entrepreneurial status relationship.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.
Rotter, J. B. (1966) · Psychological Monographs: General and Applied · doi:10.1037/h0092976 · Cited by 21,937
Burt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META‐ANALYSIS
BARRICK, M. R., & MOUNT, M. K. (1991) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x · Cited by 8,689
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?
Chen, C. C., Greene, P. G., & Crick, A. (1998) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/s0883-9026(97)00029-3 · Cited by 3,047
The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy in the Development of Entrepreneurial Intentions.
Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1265 · Cited by 2,996
Self-citationBarrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00160 · Cited by 2,356
Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis.
Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.530 · Cited by 2,164
Characteristics of Successful Entrepreneurs*
McCLELLAND, D. C. (1987) · The Journal of Creative Behavior · doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.1987.tb00479.x · Cited by 1,048
THEORY TESTING: COMBINING PSYCHOMETRIC META‐ANALYSIS AND STRUCTURAL EQUATIONS MODELING
VISWESVARAN, C., & ONES, D. S. (1995) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01784.x · Cited by 926
Cited by
Relations between personality and coping: A meta-analysis.
Connor-Smith, J. K., & Flachsbart, C. (2007) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.6.1080 · Cited by 1,453
Nguyen, H.-H. D., & Ryan, A. M. (2008) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0012702 · Cited by 913
Parental role models and the decision to become self-employed: The moderating effect of personality
Chlosta, S., Patzelt, H., Klein, S. B., & Dormann, C. (2012) · Small Business Economics · doi:10.1007/s11187-010-9270-y · Cited by 412
Entrepreneurship in a regional context: Historical roots, recent developments and future challenges
Fritsch, M., & Storey, D. J. (2014) · Regional Studies · doi:10.1080/00343404.2014.892574 · Cited by 296
Burnette, J. L., Pollack, J. M., Forsyth, R. B., Hoyt, C. L., Babij, A. D., Thomas, F. N., & Coy, A. E. (2020) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/1042258719864293 · Cited by 264
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhao, H., & Seibert, S. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2006-03
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 259-271
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2028378463
- Cited by
- 1,740
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 31.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
