Development and validation of an internet entrepreneurial self-efficacy scale

Abstract

PurposeUnderstanding people’s intentions to be an internet entrepreneur is an important issue for educators, academics and practitioners. The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate a scale to measure internet entrepreneurial self-efficacy.Design/methodology/approachBased on an analysis of 356 responses, a scale of internet entrepreneurial self-efficacy is validated in accordance with established scale development procedures.FindingsThe internet entrepreneurial self-efficacy scale has 16 items under three factors (i.e. leadership, technology utilization and internet marketing and e-commerce). The scale demonstrated adequate convergent validity, discriminant validity and criterion-related validity. Nomological validity was established by the positive correlation between the scale and, respectively, internet entrepreneurship knowledge and entrepreneurial intention.Originality/valueThis study is a pioneering effort to develop and validate a scale to measure internet entrepreneurial self-efficacy. The results of this study are helpful to researchers in building internet entrepreneurship theories and to educators in assessing and promoting individuals’ internet entrepreneurial self-efficacy and behavior.

Measuring Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy: A Comprehensive Scale

“…They developed five-point instrument consisting of 23 items that focused on the six dimensions of ESE, that is, (a) developing new product or market opportunities (b) building an innovative environment (c) initiating investor relationships (d) defining core purpose (e) coping with unexpected challenges and (f) developing critical human resources. The application of scale for measuring the ESE by other researchers (Naktiyok et al, 2010; Noel, 2002; Sánchez, 2011, 2013; Wang et al, 2019) has confirmed the reliability of the scale. It is the second most widely used scale after Chen et al ’s scale for measuring ESE across the literature as revealed by the recent meta-analytical study on ESE scales undertaken by Newman et al (2019).…”

“…The usage of this tool can distinctly help to identify particular components of ESE that have been improved due to education and training, thereby also contributing to identification of gaps in entrepreneurial education. The proposed model was tested for nascent entrepreneurs and has been subsequently used in various studies attempting to measure self-efficacy (Karlsson & Moberg, 2013; Malebana & Swanepoel, 2014; Mueller & Dato-on, 2011; Newbold, 2014; Spagnoli et al, 2017; St-Jean et al, 2014; Vanevenhoven & Liguori, 2013; Wang et al, 2019) modified McGee et al (2009) instrument by splitting the first item of the instrument in two parts thereby helping to further analyse the source of idea and also by altering the 5-point confidence level measurement scale to a ratio scale of 0 to 100 (absolutely no confidence to complete confidence). The instrument developed by Mc Gee et al (2009) is quite robust but does not take into consideration general ESE related to perseverance, risk-taking, group interpersonal skills, problem-solving skills, etc.…”

“…Few other contemporary scales of ESE include those developed by Ho et al (2018) and Wang et al (2019). Ho et al (2018) scale was partly adopted from Chan et al (2012) and rest was developed indigenously.…”

“…Wang et al (2019) developed a scale for measuring internet ESE (IESES). Previous studies like Chang et al (2018) applied the existing offline ESE scale developed by Mc Gee et al (2009) to measure IESE but it did not deliver satisfactory results.…”

Developing an Instrument for Assessing Self-Efficacy in Data Mining and Analysis

“…Based on the prior measures and definitions of self-efficacy, this study conceptually defines “self-efficacy in data mining and analysis” as an individual’s judgment of his or her ability to successfully execute data mining and analysis. The initial instrument, which consisted of 28 items, was developed based on the review of the literature on skills and abilities for executing data mining and analysis ( Fayyad et al, 1996 ; Chung and Gray, 1999 ; Mitchell, 1999 ; Chapman et al, 2000 ; Feelders et al, 2000 ; Liao, 2008 ; Han et al, 2011 ; Tufféry, 2011 ; McCormick et al, 2013 ; Singhal and Jena, 2013 ; Abbott, 2014 ; Jian and Hsu, 2014 ; Xue, 2014 ; Marvin, 2016 ; Salcedo and McCormick, 2017 ; Struhl, 2017 ; Chang and Kung, 2019 ; Liao and Wen, 2019 ; Wang, 2019 ; Wang Y. S. et al, 2019 ) and expert experience. Three global items for measuring perceived overall self-efficacy were added to serve as a criterion.…”