This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Bouckenooghe, D. Articles by Buelens, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

An Assessment of Validity in Entrepreneurship Research

Dave Bouckenooghe is a Ph.D. Scholar with Ghent University, Belgium.

Dirk De Clercq

Dirk De Clercq is Assistant Professor of Management with Brock University, Canada.

Annick Willem

Annick Willem is Assistant Professor of Management with Ghent University, Belgium.

Marc Buelens

Marc Buelens is Professor of Management, Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School and Ghent University, Belgium.

Based on an analysis of empirical articles published in the highest-rated academic journals between 1999 and 2003, we examined the current state of entrepreneurship research in terms of its validity. We collected 275 relevant publications in order to explore the entrepreneurship field with respect to internal validity, external validity, construct validity and statistical conclusion validity. Our aim was to gain insight into the dominant methodological and statistical practices that currently shape the field, shed light on possible gaps and compare these observations with the findings in general management literature. We found that entrepreneurship studies are mainly cross-sectional using surveys or field study as methods, emphasising external validity. Entrepreneurship research could benefit from more triangulation in research strategies, more advanced analytical techniques and methodologies, and from more longitudinal research resulting in higher validity levels. However, a positive trend towards more longitudinal research and triangulation in data sources is already visible.

References

• Aldrich, H.E. &Baker, T. (1997). Blinded by the cities? Has there been progress in entrepreneurship research? In D.L. Sexton and R.W. Smilor (eds), Entrepreneurship 2000 (pp. 377–400). Chicago: Upstart Publishing .
• Boyd, B.K., Gove, S. & Hitt, M.A. (2005). Construct measurement: Illusion or reality? Strategic Management Journal, 26: 239–57 .[CrossRef]
• Brewer, J. & Hunter, A. (1989). Multimethod Research: A Synthesis of Styles. New Bury Park, California: Sage Publications .
• Busenitz, L.W., Page West III, G., Shepherd, D., Nelson, T., Chandler, G. & Zacharakis, A. (2003). Entrepreneurship research in emergence: Past trends and future directions . Journal of Management, 29: 285–308 .[Abstract]
• Bygrave, W.D. (1989). The entrepreneurship paradigm: A philosophical look at its research methodologies . Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 14: 7–26 .
• Chandler, G. &Lyon, D. (2001). Issues of research design and construct measurement in entrepreneurship research: The past decade . Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25: 101–13 .
• Churchill, N.C. & Lewis, V.L. (1986). Entrepreneurship research: Directions and methods. In D.L. Sexton and R.W. Smilor (eds), The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship (pp. 333–65). Cambridge: Ballinger .
• Cook, T. & Campbell, D. (1984). Quasi-experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago: Rand McNally .
• Cook, T., Campbell, D. &Perrachio, L. (1990). Quasi-experimentation. In M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough (eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 491–576). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press .
• Cooper, A.C. (2003). Entrepreneurship: The past, the present, and the future. In Z.J. Acs and D.B. Audretsch (eds), Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research (pp. 21–34). London: Kluwer Academic Publishers .
• Cortina, J. (2002). Big things have small beginnings: An assortment of minor methodological misunderstandings . Journal of Management, 28: 339–62 .[Abstract]
• Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
• Davidsson, P. (2004). Researching Entrepreneurship. Boston: Springer Science & Business Media .
• Davidsson, P. &Wiklund, J. (2001). Levels of analysis in entrepreneurship research: Current research practice and suggestions for the future . Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26: 81–99 .
• Fried, V.H. (2003). Defining a forum for entrepreneurship scholars . Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 1–11 .[CrossRef]
• Grégoire, D., Meyer, D.G. &De Castro, J.O. (2002). The crystallization of entrepreneurship research DVs and methods in mainstream management journals . http://www.babson.edu/entrep/fer/Babson2002/XXII/XXII/P1/html/xxii-p1.htm Accessed on 14 August 2003.
• Hitt, M.A., Boyd, B.K. &Li, D. (2004). The state of strategic management research and a vision for the future. In D. Ketchen and D.D. Bergh (eds), Research Methodology in Strategy and Management (pp. 1–31). Amsterdam: Elsevier .
• Hitt, M.A., Gimeno, J. &Hoskisson, R.E. (1998). Current and future research methods in strategic management . Organizational Research Methods, 1: 6–44 .[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Hjorth, D. & Steyaert, C. (2004). Narrative and Discursive Approaches in Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing .
• Hu, L. & Bentler, P.M. (1995). Evaluating Model Fit. In R.H. Hoyle (ed.), Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications (pp. 76–99) London: Sage .
• Huse M. & Landström, H. (1997). European entrepreneurship and small business research: Methodological openness and contextual differences . International Studies of Management and Organization, 27: 3–12 .
• Ireland, R.D., Reutzel, C.R. &Webb, J.W. (2005). Entrepreneurship research in AMJ: What has been published and what might the future hold? Academy of Management Journal, 48(4): 556–64 .
• Jick, T.D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action . Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 602–611 .[CrossRef]
• Kerlinger, F. (1986). Foundations of Behavioural Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston .
• Landstroem, H. (1999). The roots of entrepreneurship research . New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 2: 9–20 .
• Lecompte, M.D. & Schensul, J.J. (1999). Designing and Conducting Ethnographic Research. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira .
• Low, M. B. & MacMillan, I.C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges . Journal of Management, 14: 139–161 .[Abstract]
• MacMillan, I.C. (1991). Delineating a forum for entrepreneurship scholars . Journal of Business Venturing, 6: 83–87 .[CrossRef]
• McGrath, J. (1982). Dilemmatics: The study of research choices and dilemmas. In J.E. McGrath, J. Martin and R. A. Kulka (eds), Judgment Calls in Research (pp. 69–102). Newbury Park, CA: Sage .
• Neter, J., Kutner, M.H., Nachtsheim, C.J. & Wasserman, W. (1996). Applied Linear Statistical Models. Boston, MA: Irwin .
• Parker, R. (1990).Power, control, and validity in research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23: 613–20 .
• Pfeffer, J. (1993). Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable . Academy of Management Review, 18: 599–620 .[CrossRef]
• Phillips, D.C. & Burbules, N.C. (2000). Post-positivism and Educational Research. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield .
• Podsakoff, P. & Organ, D. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects . Journal of Management, 12: 531–45 .[Abstract]
• Ratnatunga, J. & Romano, C. (1997). A citation classics analysis of articles in contemporary small enterprise research . Journal of Business Venturing, 12: 197–212 .[CrossRef]
• Sarasvathy, S.D. (1999). Seminar on research perspectives in entrepreneurship . Journal of Business Venturing, 15: 1–57 .
• Scandura, T.A. & Williams, E. (2000). Research methodology in management: Current practices, trends, and implications for future research . Academy of Management Journal, 43: 1248–264 .[CrossRef]
• Shane, S.A. (1997). Who is publishing the entrepreneurship research? Journal of Management, 23: 83–95 .[Abstract]
• Schwartz, R.G. & Teach, R.D. (2000). Entrepreneurship research: An empirical perspective . Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25: 77–81 .
• Stone, E.F. (1978). Research Methods in Organizational Behaviour. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman .
• Stone-Romero, E.F. (2002). The relative validity and usefulness of various empirical research designs. In S. G. Rogelberg (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Blackwell Handbooks of Research Methods in Psychology (pp. 77–98). Malden: Blackwell Publishing .
• Vanderwerf, P.A. & C.G. Brush (1989). Achieving empirical progress in an undefined field . Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 13: 45–58 .
• Wortman, M.S. (1987). Entrepreneurship: An integrating typology and evaluation of the empirical research in the field . Journal of Management, 13: 259–79 .[Abstract]

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Vol. 16, No. 2, 147-171 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/097135570701600202


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Bouckenooghe, D. Articles by Buelens, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?