A review of the research methodology of an academic article: Entrepreneurship

A review of the research methodology of an academic article: Entrepreneurship [informed by chatpdf.com]

Article name: "Para-social mentoring: The effects of entrepreneurship influencers on entrepreneurs" Journal of Business Venturing.

My question 1: "What are the research objectives of the article?"

The reply: "The research objectives of the article are primarily to explore how entrepreneurship influencers affect follower-entrepreneurs and to understand the implications of this relationship. Specifically, the study aims to:

1. Interpretation of Influencer Content: Investigate how follower-entrepreneurs interpret the content provided by entrepreneurship influencers.
2. Impact on Entrepreneurial Outcomes: Examine how this influencer content influences various entrepreneurship-related outcomes among follower-entrepreneurs.

Through these objectives, the study seeks to introduce the concept of "para-social mentoring" as a new framework within entrepreneurship research, emphasizing its benefits and potential hazards for entrepreneurs , ."

My question 2: "What are the research methods employed as reported in the article?"

The reply: "The article employs a two-study approach using different research methods:

1. Study 1 - Qualitative Method:

• Data Collection: This study utilized semi-structured interviews to gather qualitative data from entrepreneurs. A total of 22 interviews were conducted in two waves: the first wave included 15 interviews in Spring 2019 and the second wave had 16 interviews in Fall 2023.
• Sampling: Entrepreneurs were selected using purposive sampling from personal networks and entrepreneurship support organizations. The interviews focused on participants' experiences and interpretations of consuming influencer content.
• Data Analysis: The data from interviews were analyzed iteratively to develop a conceptual model around the para-social mentoring construct.

2. Study 2 - Quantitative Method:

• Survey Method: This study involved surveying 613 entrepreneurs across two time points to test the hypotheses that emerged from the qualitative findings of Study 1.
• Hypothesis Testing: The survey aimed to validate the relationships proposed in the para-social mentoring model.

By combining qualitative and quantitative methods, the research seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of how entrepreneurship influencers impact follower-entrepreneurs , , ."

My question 3: "What is the underlying research philosophy of the study as reported in the article?"

The reply: "The underlying research philosophy of the study is primarily qualitative and interpretivist in nature. This is evident from the use of semi-structured interviews in Study 1, which focused on understanding the personal experiences, interpretations, and subjective meanings that entrepreneurs attribute to their interactions with entrepreneurship influencers.

The qualitative approach aligns with the interpretivist paradigm, which emphasizes understanding social phenomena from the perspective of the participants involved, highlighting the complexities of human behavior and relationships, such as the attachment and meanings entrepreneurs assign to influencers as para-social mentors , .

Furthermore, the study incorporates grounded theory methodology, which involves inductively developing theories based on the data collected from interviews. This process reflects a commitment to understanding the context and nuances of the entrepreneur-influencer relationship, rather than testing pre-defined hypotheses , .

In summary, the study operates within an interpretivist framework that values subjective insights and aims to develop a conceptual understanding of para-social mentoring in an entrepreneurial context."

My question 4: "Did the study employ the mono method, multi method or mixed method as its overall research approach?"

The reply: "The study employed a mixed method approach as its overall research strategy. This is evident from the combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods in the two studies conducted:

1. Study 1 utilized qualitative methods through semi-structured interviews to explore how follower-entrepreneurs interpret content from entrepreneurship influencers and the effects of such content on their entrepreneurial outcomes. This study involved collecting and analyzing qualitative data to develop a conceptual model of para-social mentoring.

2. Study 2 followed up with quantitative methods by surveying 613 entrepreneurs to test the hypotheses derived from the qualitative findings of Study 1. This involved gathering numerical data to statistically validate the relationships outlined in the conceptual model.

Such an integration of qualitative insights with quantitative validation indicates a mixed method approach aimed at providing a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomena under study , , ."

My question 5: "Were the research method design informed by any academic theories?"

The reply: "Yes, the research method design was informed by several academic theories. The primary theoretical framework guiding the studies is the concept of para-social relationships, particularly as they relate to mentoring functions in entrepreneurship. This theory describes the one-sided relationships that media users (in this case, follower-entrepreneurs) develop with media figures, perceiving them as sources of support and guidance despite the lack of reciprocal interactions , , .

In specific terms, the following theoretical influences were identified in the studies:

1. Para-Social Relationship Theory: This theory, referenced in the context of Labrecque (2014) and Tukachinsky et al. (2020), suggests that individuals create emotional attachments to media figures, akin to mentor-protégé relationships, even when personal connections do not exist. This theoretical lens guided the exploration of how entrepreneurs relate to influencers and the perceived mentoring roles they occupy.

2. Mentoring Theory: Traditional mentoring theory, including references to the works of Haggard et al. (2011) and Kram (1985), underpins the investigation into the mentoring-like functions that entrepreneurs attribute to influencers. This informs the study’s conceptual framework linking para-social experiences to various entrepreneurial outcomes such as self-efficacy and venture optimism , .

3. Grounded Theory: The qualitative research was structured around grounded theory methodology, which allows researchers to develop theories based on systematic data collection and analysis, thereby aligning the resulting conceptual model with empirical observations gathered from entrepreneurs .

In summary, the research design was indeed informed by these academic theories, contributing to both the development of the conceptual model in Study 1 and the hypotheses tested in Study 2."

My question 6: "Did the study employ the deductive, inductive or the abductive research approaches?"

The reply: "The study primarily employed an inductive research approach in its initial phase (Study 1). This is evident from the qualitative nature of the research, where the authors conducted semi-structured interviews to gather data and develop a conceptual model based on the participants' experiences and interpretations regarding entrepreneurship influencers and their content. The inductive approach allowed the researchers to derive themes and insights from the qualitative data without pre-existing hypotheses, focusing on how follower-entrepreneurs perceived and interacted with influencers as mentors , .

In contrast, Study 2 utilized a deductive research approach. This phase involved testing specific hypotheses derived from the conceptual model developed in Study 1 using quantitative methods, specifically through a survey of 613 entrepreneurs. The researchers formulated hypotheses based on the insights gained during the inductive phase and then sought to confirm or refute these hypotheses through statistical analysis , .

Overall, the study reflects a combination of inductive and deductive approaches, aligning with a sequential exploratory design: starting with inductive qualitative research to build a conceptual framework and followed by deductive quantitative research to test that framework."

My question 7: "Did the study employ the triangulation method?"

The reply: "Yes, the study employed a triangulation method. The researchers utilized different data sources and research methods to enhance the robustness of their findings. Specifically, they conducted qualitative interviews in Study 1 to explore how follower-entrepreneurs interpreted the content of entrepreneurship influencers and to develop an inductive conceptual model. This qualitative data provided rich insights into the experiences and beliefs of the participants , .

In Study 2, the researchers tested the hypotheses developed from the qualitative data using a quantitative survey of 613 entrepreneurs. By comparing findings from the qualitative phase with those from the quantitative phase, the authors triangulated their results to strengthen the evidence for their conclusions regarding the impact of para-social mentoring on entrepreneurship-oriented outcomes , .

The combination of qualitative interviews and quantitative surveys allowed the researchers to validate their findings and ensure a comprehensive understanding of the research questions, thus demonstrating the use of triangulation in their study design."

My question 8: "Does the research methodology design address the research objectives of the study?"

The reply: "Yes, the research methodology design effectively addresses the research objectives of the study. The study's objectives were centered on understanding how entrepreneurship influencers impact follower-entrepreneurs, specifically examining the interpretation of content by these followers and the resulting entrepreneurship-related outcomes.

1. Study 1 (Qualitative Methodology): The qualitative methodology, which involved semi-structured interviews, was well-suited to address the first objective: to explore how follower-entrepreneurs interpret the content of entrepreneurship influencers. This methodology allowed the researchers to capture nuanced insights and personal experiences from a diverse group of entrepreneurs, providing depth to the understanding of para-social mentoring relationships that develop with influencers. The inductive approach enabled the emergence of themes related to mentoring functions (e.g., coaching, role modeling) and identification of key entrepreneurship-related outcomes (like self-efficacy and feelings of inadequacy) directly from the participants' voices , , .

2. Study 2 (Quantitative Methodology): To address the second research objective of evaluating how such influencer content affects entrepreneurship-related outcomes, the researchers implemented a quantitative survey. This allowed them to systematically test hypotheses derived from the qualitative findings in Study 1 across a larger sample of entrepreneurs. The survey results provided empirical evidence supporting the positive relationships between para-social mentoring and various entrepreneurship-oriented outcomes, thereby validating the conceptual model developed in the first study , .

Overall, the sequential use of qualitative and quantitative methodologies—first to explore and then to confirm—aligns with the research objectives and enhances the validity and reliability of the findings. It effectively addresses both the interpretative and evaluative dimensions of the study's goals."

My question 9: "What is the research method design quality of the study, in terms of the qualitative research method design quality criteria and quantitative research method design quality criteria?"

The reply: "The research method design quality of the study can be evaluated based on qualitative and quantitative research method design quality criteria.

Qualitative Research Method Design Quality Criteria

1. Credibility: The study demonstrated credibility through a thorough inductive qualitative approach, conducting semi-structured interviews to gather rich, in-depth data from 22 entrepreneurs. The researchers ensured that the interviews were comprehensive, with a focus on participants' lived experiences and interpretations of influencers' content , .

2. Transferability: While the sample size in Study 1 was relatively small (22 interviews), the study carefully described the context and demographic backgrounds of participants, which can help readers assess the applicability of findings to other contexts. However, there may be limitations in generalizing findings due to the small sample size .

3. Dependability: The research followed best practices in qualitative research, such as iterative data analysis and memoing, which enhanced the dependability of findings. These methods support a systematic approach to data interpretation .

4. Confirmability: The research focused on ensuring that findings were derived from the data collected, with the participants’ voice emphasized. The researchers articulated how their themes emerged from the interviews, enhancing confirmability , .

Quantitative Research Method Design Quality Criteria

1. Internal Validity: Study 2 employed a robust survey methodology with a sample size of 613 entrepreneurs. The use of control variables and the collection of data at two time points supported the internal validity of the study. The power analysis indicated that the sample size was adequate for detecting relationships in the data, which strengthens the validity of the conclusions drawn , .

2. External Validity: The study utilized Prolific, a platform known for providing access to diverse respondents, which enhances the external validity and representativeness of findings. The demographic details collected from respondents also allow for the assessment of generalizability .

3. Reliability: The survey instrument was carefully designed with attention to data quality; measures included timing checks, attention checks to filter out careless responses, and ensuring high completion rates. This rigor in survey design contributes to the reliability of the findings .

4. Statistical Analysis: The hypothesis testing in Study 2 was clearly outlined, with results supporting nine out of ten hypotheses. This demonstrates the survey's effectiveness in evaluating the relationships outlined in the theoretical model developed in the qualitative phase , .

Overall Assessment

Overall, the research method design quality of the study is strong in both qualitative and quantitative aspects. The qualitative phase provides a depth of insight into the phenomenon of para-social mentoring, while the quantitative phase offers empirical validation of the theoretical framework. The careful attention to methodological rigor in both stages contributes positively to the quality of the research design. However, the small sample size in the qualitative phase could be noted as a limitation for broader applicability."

Reference: a collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.