IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02311817.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intuition Versus Analysis? Testing Differential Models of Cognitive Style on Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy and the New Venture Creation Process

Author

Listed:
  • Jill Kickul

    (NYU - New York University [New York] - NYU - NYU System)

  • Lisa Gundry

    (DePaul University [Chicago])

  • Saulo Dubard Barbosa

    (EM - EMLyon Business School)

  • Laney Whitcanack

Abstract

This research revealed the significant role of two distinct cognitive styles as a determinant of perceived entrepreneurial self-efficacy regarding the different stages of the new venture process. The study found that individuals' cognitive preference for analysis or intuition influences their perception and assessment of their entrepreneurial self-efficacy in their intentions to create a new venture. Individuals with the intuitive cognitive style were more confident in their ability to identify and recognize opportunities, without much confidence in their capacity of assessment, evaluation, planning, and marshalling of resources. Conversely, individuals with the analytic cognitive style were more confident in their abilities to assess, evaluate, plan, and marshal resources, but felt less confident in their abilities to search for and recognize new opportunities.

Suggested Citation

  • Jill Kickul & Lisa Gundry & Saulo Dubard Barbosa & Laney Whitcanack, 2009. "Intuition Versus Analysis? Testing Differential Models of Cognitive Style on Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy and the New Venture Creation Process," Post-Print hal-02311817, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02311817
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00298.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-02311817. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.