Decoding evidence-based entrepreneurship: A systematic review of meta-analytic choices and reporting.

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Název: Decoding evidence-based entrepreneurship: A systematic review of meta-analytic choices and reporting.
Autoři: Rauch, Andreas1,2 (AUTHOR) andreas.j.rauch@gmail.com, Saeed, Saadat3 (AUTHOR), Frese, Michael4,5 (AUTHOR)
Zdroj: Journal of Small Business Management. Jul/Aug2025, Vol. 63 Issue 4, p1783-1829. 47p.
Témata: *QUALITY control, *MULTIVARIATE analysis, *QUANTITATIVE research, *STATISTICS, CONTENT analysis
Abstrakt: Meta-analysis—the statistical analysis of a large collection of analysis results from individual studies for the purpose of integrating the findings substantially contributes to paradigm development in the field of entrepreneurship. Notably, a number of choices are made when conducting a meta-analysis. Many of these choices have implications for the interpretation of the results, affecting one of the core aims of meta-analysis, that is, to generate generalizable best evidence. To better understand meta-analysis evidence in the field of entrepreneurship it is essential to understand how these meta-analyses are conducted, what type of methodological choices have been made and communicated, and how these choices affect the interpretation of findings. To address these issues, we performed a content analysis of 90 meta-analyses up to 2021 and investigate 74 methodological choices made by the authors. We identify and offer suggestions for future practice in seven areas: the study location strategy, the use of a second coding, the assessment of heterogeneity, multivariate analysis, quality checks, the violation of assumptions, and the interpretation of meta-analytical findings. In so doing, we hope to contribute to best practices and to the legitimacy of validity generalization in the domain of entrepreneurship research. Moreover, we provide a comprehensive and evidence-based understanding of the interpretation and implications of meta-analysis practices for theory building and testing and scholarly impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of Small Business Management is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Databáze: Business Source Index
Popis
Abstrakt:Meta-analysis—the statistical analysis of a large collection of analysis results from individual studies for the purpose of integrating the findings substantially contributes to paradigm development in the field of entrepreneurship. Notably, a number of choices are made when conducting a meta-analysis. Many of these choices have implications for the interpretation of the results, affecting one of the core aims of meta-analysis, that is, to generate generalizable best evidence. To better understand meta-analysis evidence in the field of entrepreneurship it is essential to understand how these meta-analyses are conducted, what type of methodological choices have been made and communicated, and how these choices affect the interpretation of findings. To address these issues, we performed a content analysis of 90 meta-analyses up to 2021 and investigate 74 methodological choices made by the authors. We identify and offer suggestions for future practice in seven areas: the study location strategy, the use of a second coding, the assessment of heterogeneity, multivariate analysis, quality checks, the violation of assumptions, and the interpretation of meta-analytical findings. In so doing, we hope to contribute to best practices and to the legitimacy of validity generalization in the domain of entrepreneurship research. Moreover, we provide a comprehensive and evidence-based understanding of the interpretation and implications of meta-analysis practices for theory building and testing and scholarly impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:00472778
DOI:10.1080/00472778.2024.2411246