| Literature DB >> 35465517 |
Lingjie Wang1, Jianhao Huang2.
Abstract
In this study, we explore the psychological mechanisms underlying the relation between college students' post-traumatic growth and their entrepreneurial intentions in the post-COVID-19 era. Using the post-traumatic growth, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, prosocial tendency, and entrepreneurial intention scales, we tested 690 valid samples of Chinese undergraduates (including 445 men and 245 women). The results revealed that post-traumatic growth of college students in the post-COVID-19 era will have a significant and positive effect on their entrepreneurial intentions. Additionally, the results indicated that students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy and prosocial tendencies play a partial mediation role between post-traumatic growth and entrepreneurial intentions in the post-COVID-19 era and that there is a chain mediating effect between students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy and prosocial tendencies. This study provides valuable insights into the influence of post-traumatic growth on entrepreneurial intentions among college students in the post-COVID-19 era and suggests that colleges and universities can improve students' entrepreneurial intentions by adopting measures to foster their post-traumatic growth, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and prosocial tendencies.Entities:
Keywords: entrepreneurial intention; entrepreneurial self-efficacy; post-traumatic growth; prosocial tendency; the post-COVID-19 era
Year: 2022 PMID: 35465517 PMCID: PMC9021958 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.861484
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Model comparison of CFA.
| Model |
|
| RMR | GFI | CFI | PNFI |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | 21394.05 | 1829 | 0.09 | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.45 | – | – | – |
| Model 2 | 12901.33 | 1709 | 0.06 | 0.66 | 0.71 | 0.63 | – | – | – |
| Model 3 | 13687.55 | 1807 | 0.07 | 0.64 | 0.69 | 0.61 | – | – | – |
| M2–M1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 8492.72 | 120 | 0.000 |
| M3–M1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 7706.5 | 22 | 0.000 |
| M2–M3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 786.22 | 98 | 0.000 |
Model 1, Single first-order factor model; Model 2, 16 first-order factors model, and Model 3, 4 second-order factors model.
Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis between the observable variables.
| Variables | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.61 | 0.99 | 1 | |||||||||||||||
| 2 | 3.84 | 0.94 | 0.564*** | 1 | ||||||||||||||
| 3 | 4.13 | 0.82 | 0.524*** | 0.655*** | 1 | |||||||||||||
| 4 | 4.27 | 0.93 | 0.396*** | 0.648*** | 0.642*** | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 5 | 3.54 | 0.69 | 0.416*** | 0.614*** | 0.585*** | 0.464*** | 1 | |||||||||||
| 6 | 3.35 | 0.75 | 0.494*** | 0.621*** | 0.577*** | 0.524*** | 0.687*** | 1 | ||||||||||
| 7 | 3.64 | 0.68 | 0.457*** | 0.512*** | 0.541*** | 0.485*** | 0.672*** | 0.646*** | 1 | |||||||||
| 8 | 3.08 | 0.80 | 0.398*** | 0.505*** | 0.446*** | 0.392*** | 0.605*** | 0.649*** | 0.676*** | 1 | ||||||||
| 9 | 3.48 | 0.73 | 0.374*** | 0.343*** | 0.456*** | 0.397*** | 0.429*** | 0.430*** | 0.470*** | 0.477*** | 1 | |||||||
| 10 | 3.76 | 0.78 | 0.382*** | 0.476*** | 0.500*** | 0.440*** | 0.432*** | 0.422*** | 0.395*** | 0.278*** | 0.299*** | 1 | ||||||
| 11 | 4.00 | 0.75 | 0.415*** | 0.479*** | 0.516*** | 0.440*** | 0.514*** | 0.510*** | 0.529*** | 0.392*** | 0.306*** | 0.666*** | 1 | |||||
| 12 | 3.67 | 0.61 | 0.427*** | 0.483*** | 0.438*** | 0.437*** | 0.459*** | 0.475*** | 0.569*** | 0.441*** | 0.466*** | 0.470*** | 0.549*** | 1 | ||||
| 13 | 3.67 | 0.74 | 0.443*** | 0.482*** | 0.442*** | 0.435*** | 0.564*** | 0.474*** | 0.458*** | 0.486*** | 0.477*** | 0.422*** | 0.584*** | 0.576*** | 1 | |||
| 14 | 3.91 | 0.67 | 0.412*** | 0.505*** | 0.375*** | 0.395*** | 0.507*** | 0.462*** | 0.453*** | 0.336*** | 0.421*** | 0.530*** | 0.578*** | 0.548*** | 0.587*** | 1 | ||
| 15 | 4.61 | 1.33 | 0.530*** | 0.608*** | 0.643*** | 0.528*** | 0.578*** | 0.647*** | 0.590*** | 0.646*** | 0.481*** | 0.517*** | 0.557*** | 0.519*** | 0.607*** | 0.500*** | 1 | |
| 16 | 4.30 | 1.14 | 0.504*** | 0.538*** | 0.631*** | 0.487*** | 0.549*** | 0.633*** | 0.562*** | 0.628*** | 0.468*** | 0.461*** | 0.493*** | 0.522*** | 0.607*** | 0.394*** | 0.809*** | 1 |
1, relating to others, 2, new possibilities, 3, personal strength, 4, spiritual change, 5, tolerance ambiguity self-efficacy, 6, opportunity-identification self-efficacy, 7, relationship self-efficacy, 8, managerial self-efficacy, 9, public, 10, anonymous, 11, altruism, 12 = compliant, 13, emotional, 14, dire, 15, goal intention, and 16, implementation intention. ***p < 0.001.
Comparison between single-factor model and multi-factor model.
| Model |
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single-factor model | 21394.047 | 1829 | 8492.713 | 120 | 0.001 |
| Multi-factor model | 12901.334 | 1709 |
Figure 1Standardized parameter estimation of the final model. PTG, Post-traumatic growth, ESE, Entrepreneurial self-efficacy, PT, Prosocial tendencies, and EI, Entrepreneurial intention; ***p < 0.001.
Summary table of path effects.
| Path | Effect | 95% LLCI | 95% ULCI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct effect | 0.298** | 0.160 | 0.430 |
| Indirect effect1 | 0.302** | 0.198 | 0.422 |
| Indirect effect2 | 0.117** | 0.063 | 0.191 |
| Indirect effect3 | 0.095** | 0.052 | 0.148 |
| Total effect | 0.515** | 0.403 | 0.635 |
Bootstrapping random sampling 5,000 times; direct effect = PTG→entrepreneurial intention; indirect effect 1 = PTG→entrepreneurial self-efficacy→entrepreneurial intention; indirect effect 2 = PTG→prosocial tendencies→entrepreneurial intention; and indirect effect 3 = PTG→entrepreneurial self-efficacy→prosocial tendencies→entrepreneurial intention. **p < 0.010.
Model comparison of SEM.
| Model |
|
| RMR | GFI | CFI | PNFI |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | 68.436 | 8 | 0.03 | 0.97 | 0.98 | 0.52 | – | – | – |
| Model 2 | 241.727 | 32 | 0.03 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.68 | – | – | – |
| Model 3 | 435.939 | 51 | 0.03 | 0.91 | 0.92 | 0.71 | – | – | – |
| Model 4 | 836.758 | 98 | 0.03 | 0.87 | 0.90 | 0.73 | – | – | – |
| M4-M1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 768.32 | 90 | 0.000 |
| M4-M2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 595.03 | 66 | 0.000 |
| M4-M3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 400.82 | 47 | 0.000 |
PTG, Post-traumatic growth, ESE, Entrepreneurial self-efficacy, PT, Prosocial tendencies, and EI, Entrepreneurial intention. Model 1 = PTG→EI, Model 2 = PTG→ESE→EI, Model 3 = PTG→PT→EI, and Model 4 = PTG→ESE→PT→EI.