IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/13502_8.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Hormonal Influence on Male Decision-making: Implications for Organizational Management

In: Neuroeconomics and the Firm

Author

Listed:
  • Angela A. Stanton

Abstract

The ideal firm has been studied over several centuries, yet little is known about what makes one successful and another fail. This pioneering book brings together leading researchers investigating the concept of the firm from a neuroscientific perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Angela A. Stanton, 2010. "Hormonal Influence on Male Decision-making: Implications for Organizational Management," Chapters, in: Angela A. Stanton & Mellani Day & Isabell M. Welpe (ed.), Neuroeconomics and the Firm, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:13502_8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781848444409.00019.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Forlani, David & Mullins, John W., 2000. "Perceived risks and choices in entrepreneurs' new venture decisions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 305-322, July.
    2. White, Roderick E. & Thornhill, Stewart & Hampson, Elizabeth, 2006. "Entrepreneurs and evolutionary biology: The relationship between testosterone and new venture creation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 21-34, May.
    3. Alison L. Booth & Patrick Nolen, 2012. "Gender differences in risk behaviour: does nurture matter?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(558), pages 56-78, February.
    4. Hå Holm & Peter Engseld, 2005. "Choosing Bargaining Partners—An Experimental Study on the Impact of Information About Income, Status and Gender," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(3), pages 183-216, September.
    5. Baron, Robert A., 2004. "The cognitive perspective: a valuable tool for answering entrepreneurship's basic "why" questions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 221-239, March.
    6. Catherine C. Eckel & Angela de Oliveira & Philip J. Grossman, 2008. "Gender and Negotiation in the Small: Are Women Perceived to Be More Cooperative than Men?," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-02, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    7. Hean Tat Keh & Maw Der Foo & Boon Chong Lim, 2002. "Opportunity Evaluation under Risky Conditions: The Cognitive Processes of Entrepreneurs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 27(2), pages 125-148, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lori Verstegen Ryan, 2017. "Sex Differences Through a Neuroscience Lens: Implications for Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(4), pages 771-782, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Angela A. Stanton & Isabell M. Welpe, 2010. "Risk and Ambiguity: Entrepreneurial Research from the Perspective of Economics," Chapters, in: Angela A. Stanton & Mellani Day & Isabell M. Welpe (ed.), Neuroeconomics and the Firm, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Werner Bönte & Vivien D. Procher & Diemo Urbig, 2016. "Biology and Selection into Entrepreneurship—The Relevance of Prenatal Testosterone Exposure," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 40(5), pages 1121-1148, September.
    3. Dietmar Grichnik & Alexander Smeja & Isabell Welpe, 2010. "The Importance of Being Emotional: How do Emotions Affect Entrepreneurial Opportunity Evaluation and Exploitation?," Post-Print hal-00856603, HAL.
    4. Andreas Hack & Frauke Bieberstein & Nils D. Kraiczy, 2016. "Reference point formation and new venture creation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 447-465, March.
    5. Isabell M. Welpe & Matthias Spörrle & Dietmar Grichnik & Theresa Michl & David B. Audretsch, 2012. "Emotions and Opportunities: The Interplay of Opportunity Evaluation, Fear, Joy, and Anger as Antecedent of Entrepreneurial Exploitation," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 36(1), pages 69-96, January.
    6. Maria Claudia Angel Ferrero & Véronique Bessière, 2016. "From Lab to Venture: Cognitive Factors Influencing Researchers' Decision to Start a Venture," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(02), pages 101-131, June.
    7. Gupta, Vishal K. & Goktan, A. Banu & Gunay, Gonca, 2014. "Gender differences in evaluation of new business opportunity: A stereotype threat perspective," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 273-288.
    8. Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 3, pages 229-330, Elsevier.
    9. Fellnhofer, Katharina, 2022. "Entrepreneurial alertness toward responsible research and innovation: Digital technology makes the psychological heart of entrepreneurship pound," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Catherine Eckel & Lata Gangadharan & Philip J. Grossman & Nina Xue, 2021. "The gender leadership gap: insights from experiments," Chapters, in: Ananish Chaudhuri (ed.), A Research Agenda for Experimental Economics, chapter 7, pages 137-162, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Kollmann, Tobias & Stöckmann, Christoph & Kensbock, Julia M., 2017. "Fear of failure as a mediator of the relationship between obstacles and nascent entrepreneurial activity—An experimental approach," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 280-301.
    12. Najoua Dali & Sana Harbi, 2016. "The Effect of Risk Perception and Cognitive Biases on the Evaluation of Opportunity in Family and Non-Family Entrepreneurs: The Case of Tunisian Entrepreneurs," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(03), pages 281-312, September.
    13. Laura von Arnim & Matthias Mrozewski, 2020. "Entrepreneurship in an Increasingly Digital and Global World. Evaluating the Role of Digital Capabilities on International Entrepreneurial Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-18, September.
    14. Emre Şahin Dölarslan & Akin Koçak & Alper Özer, 2017. "“Bats Are Blind?” Cognitive Biases In Risk Perception Of Entrepreneurs," Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship (JDE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(03), pages 1-13, September.
    15. Stephen X. Zhang & Javier Cueto, 2017. "The Study of Bias in Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 41(3), pages 419-454, May.
    16. M. Kannadhasan & Pankaj Singh & Parikshit Charan & Pavan Kumar Balivada, 2018. "Personality characteristics and the process of start-up: the moderating role of institutional environment," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 45(4), pages 287-300, December.
    17. Kuckertz, Andreas & Wagner, Marcus, 2010. "The influence of sustainability orientation on entrepreneurial intentions -- Investigating the role of business experience," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 524-539, September.
    18. Shahriar, Abu Zafar M., 2018. "Gender differences in entrepreneurial propensity: Evidence from matrilineal and patriarchal societies," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 762-779.
    19. Mateja Drnovšek & Sanda Franiæ & Alenka Slavec, 2018. "Exploring antecedents of business angels’ intention to invest," Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci/Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Economics and Business, vol. 36(2), pages 701-734.
    20. Urbig, Diemo & Monsen, Erik, 2012. "The structure of optimism: “Controllability affects the extent to which efficacy beliefs shape outcome expectancies”," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 854-867.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:13502_8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Darrel McCalla (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.e-elgar.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.