Extraversion and entrepreneurial intention: Dual mediation of social support and institutional resources
Main Article Content
Cite this article:
Gao, J., & Li, M.
(2026). Extraversion and entrepreneurial intention: Dual mediation of social support and institutional resources.
Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal,
54(4),
e15607.
Abstract
Full Text
References
Tables and Figures
Acknowledgments
Author Contact
This study examined the dual mediating roles of perceived social support and institutional resources (e.g., entrepreneurship training and funding access) in the relationship between extraversion and entrepreneurial intention among Chinese college students. We conducted a survey of 589 students at Shaanxi Preschool Teachers’ College, and structural equation modeling revealed that extraversion not only directly predicted entrepreneurial intention, but was also indirectly associated with entrepreneurial intention through the mediators of social support and institutional resources. Exploratory analysis revealed gender and disciplinary differences, with men and those in applied fields (e.g., engineering) exhibiting stronger intentions than women and those working in theoretical fields. These findings extend Shapero and Sokol’s (1982) entrepreneurial event model by incorporating institutional drivers, and offer practical strategies for universities to develop tailored entrepreneurship programs.
Article Highlights
Extraversion directly and indirectly predicted college students’ entrepreneurial intention through the mediators of perceived social support and institutional resources.
Men and those in applied disciplines exhibited stronger entrepreneurial intention than women and those in theoretical fields, and this effect was moderated by unequal access to institutional resources.
By integrating ecological systems theory, this study has extended the entrepreneurial event model, positioning mesolevel institutional drivers as active mediators.
We encourage universities to design discipline-specific incubators for applied fields and build peer mentorship networks for humanities students, aligning resources with personality traits and academic contexts.
Among college students, entrepreneurial intention has become a critical response to global youth unemployment challenges (Ralph & Arora, 2023). While extraversion, a personality trait marked by sociability and assertiveness, is a robust predictor of entrepreneurial intention (Zhao et al., 2010), the mechanisms underlying this relationship remain insufficiently explained. Prior research has identified perceived social support as a mediator (Wang et al., 2023), but has overlooked the influence of institutional resources, such as funding and training programs, despite their growing prominence in university-driven entrepreneurial ecosystems (Walter & Block, 2016). Given that entrepreneurial intention emerges from complex person–environment interactions, Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory offers a suitable lens to examine how individual traits and institutional resources jointly predict entrepreneurial intention (Crawford, 2020). Grounded in this theory, this study proposed a dual mediation model to address this gap, examining how extraversion can predict entrepreneurial intention through mesolevel social support and macrolevel institutional resources.
The current literature offers partial insights. Extraverts’ expansive social networks facilitate opportunity recognition (Hmieleski & Baron, 2009) and amplify perceived social support (Liang et al., 2020), thereby positively predicting entrepreneurial intention. However, institutional environments are often framed as passive contexts rather than active mediators. For instance, Nabi et al. (2017) demonstrated that entrepreneurship education elevates self-efficacy, but they overlooked how extraverts’ trait-driven resource mobilization intensifies these effects. Furthermore, persistent gender and disciplinary disparities, such as men and those in applied majors like engineering reporting stronger entrepreneurial intentions (Wilson et al., 2007), lack explanations rooted in resource accessibility dynamics. This oversight contradicts ecological systems theory, which emphasizes multilevel interactions between individual traits and institutional structures.
This study advances this research area in two key ways. First, we extended the entrepreneurial event model (Shapero & Sokol, 1982) by integrating institutional resources as a macrolevel mediator, thereby testing how the association between extraversion and entrepreneurial intention is mediated through both social support and institutional resource channels. Second, we operationalized institutional resources through actionable dimensions such as mentorship accessibility, directly addressing calls for university-specific strategies (Walter & Block, 2016). Hence, we proposed a dual mediation model to examine how extraversion predicts entrepreneurial intention through both social support and institutional resources, while exploring potential contextual variations by gender and academic discipline. Notably, these effects have been found to be stronger among men and those in applied disciplines, a pattern that is consistent with social role theory and institutional resource dependence mechanisms (Liñán et al., 2024). By synthesizing personality psychology and institutional analysis, this study formed a dynamic framework to advance theoretical understanding of entrepreneurial intention formation in academic contexts.
Ecological Systems Theory
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory emphasizes the dynamic interplay between individuals and their multilayered environments. We adapted this theory into a multilevel framework that conceptualizes entrepreneurial intention as the product of dynamic interactions between individuals and their environments. This framework posits three interdependent dimensions: microsystem individual traits (e.g., extraversion), mesosystem social systems (e.g., peer networks), and mesosystem institutional resources (e.g., university policies). Crucially, these dimensions interact bidirectionally, as individuals proactively shape their environments (e.g., by advocating for policy changes), while institutional structures simultaneously reinforce or constrain trait-driven behaviors (Manning et al., 2024). This dynamic interplay underscores the core premise of Bronfenbrenner’s theory, where person–environment interactions are reciprocal and coevolutionary.
Extraversion has been found to predict entrepreneurial intention through both direct trait effects, such as risk tolerance (Zhao et al., 2010), and indirect environmental engagement. Extraverts proactively build social networks to access mentorship (mesolevel; Liang et al., 2020), and navigate institutional resources like funding programs (macrolevel; Walter & Block, 2016), both of which reciprocally strengthen their intentions. This challenges static views of institutional resources as passive contexts. Instead, they are dynamic mediators shaped by trait-driven behaviors (Manning et al., 2024). For instance, assertive students may advocate for new incubators, altering institutional conditions for peers.
Ecological systems theory extends the entrepreneurial event model (Shapero & Sokol, 1982) by integrating multilevel environmental dynamics. While traditional models focus on individual perceptions of feasibility or desirability, ecological systems theory emphasizes how institutional accessibility and social support coevolve with personality, offering a holistic entrepreneurial intention framework for academic contexts.
Extraversion and Entrepreneurial Intention
Extraversion, a core dimension of the Big Five personality model, encompasses traits such as sociability, assertiveness, and enthusiasm in social interactions (Roccas et al., 2002). Individuals with high levels of extraversion thrive in interpersonal environments, often seeking stimulation through networking and collaboration, a behavioral pattern aligned with entrepreneurial demands. Entrepreneurial intention, defined as the goal-oriented commitment to initiate and execute venture creation (Thompson, 2009), emerges as a natural outcome of such trait–environment congruence.
Empirical studies have consistently highlighted the role of extraversion in fostering entrepreneurial intention. Extraverts’ inherent sociability facilitates expansive social networks, enhancing access to resources and opportunities (Obschonka et al., 2012). For instance, proactive behaviors critical to venture creation, such as pitching ideas and mobilizing support, are strongly associated with extraversion (Rauch & Frese, 2007). Similarly, students with high levels of extraversion exhibit heightened opportunity-recognition skills, enabling them to identify and act on market gaps (Kickul et al., 2009). These findings align with career choice theory (Holland, 1997), which posits that personality traits shape occupational preferences by aligning with perceived role demands. Extraverts’ affinity for dynamic, socially interactive roles makes entrepreneurship a salient career path. Thus, we proposed the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1: Extraversion will positively predict entrepreneurial intention.
Perceived Social Support as a Mediator
Perceived social support (PSS) reflects an individual’s subjective belief in the availability of relational resources, such as emotional encouragement, mentorship, or financial assistance, from their social network (Cohen & Wills, 1985). In entrepreneurial contexts, PSS serves dual functions, buffering stressors, such as financial risks, and predicting self-efficacy by reinforcing confidence in navigating uncertainty (Haque & Kour, 2024). For example, students who perceive strong peer or familial support are more likely to transform entrepreneurial ideas into actionable plans, as such support mitigates the fear of failure (Stam et al., 2014).
From an ecological ecosystem perspective, PSS operates as a mesolevel mechanism that bridges individual microlevel traits and institutional macrolevel environments. Extraverts’ inherent sociability drives them to cultivate expansive social networks, which, in turn, provide both psychological validation, such as encouragement, and instrumental resources, such as mentorship and funding (Davidsson & Honig, 2003). This process is bidirectional. For instance, extraverted students embedded in resource-rich social circles demonstrate higher persistence in entrepreneurial ventures, even amid setbacks, due to sustained relational reinforcement (Xie et al., 2025). These dynamics align with Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) emphasis on proximal processes, where mesolevel person–environment interactions amplify individual predispositions. Thus, we proposed the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2: Perceived social support will mediate the positive relationship between extraversion and entrepreneurial intention.
Institutional Resources as a Mediator
Institutional resources, encompassing entrepreneurship education, funding accessibility, and mentorship, may act as a macrolevel catalyst channeling extraverts’ energy into entrepreneurial intention. According to ecological systems theory, these resources are not static backdrops, but dynamic systems shaped by individuals’ proactive engagement. Entrepreneurship education equips students with practical skills, such as business planning, while funding access and mentorship reduce financial and knowledge barriers (Nabi et al., 2017), collectively bridging the gap between personality traits and venture creation.
Resource dependence theory (Reitz, 1979) aligns with this perspective, positing that institutional support mitigates perceived feasibility gaps. For example, structured training programs predict self-efficacy, enabling students to translate abstract ideas into viable ventures (Souitaris et al., 2007). Extraverts, characterized by assertiveness and reward-seeking tendencies, are uniquely positioned to exploit these resources. They actively pursue networking events, grant opportunities, and mentorship programs (St-Jean & Audet, 2012), transforming institutional offerings into personalized advantages. Empirical studies have confirmed that such resource utilization amplifies entrepreneurial intention, particularly among extraverts who leverage institutional support to scale ventures (Huang & Kee, 2024).
This process exemplifies Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) bidirectional person–environment interaction: Extraverts’ trait-driven behaviors reshape institutional accessibility (e.g., advocating for better funding policies), which, in turn, lowers entry barriers for future entrepreneurs. Mentorship programs, for instance, not only provide strategic advice but also create ecosystems where extraverts’ social energy aligns with actionable plans (Piperopoulos & Dimov, 2015), reinforcing the synergy between macrolevel resources and microlevel traits. Thus, we proposed the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 3: Institutional resources will mediate the positive relationship between extraversion and entrepreneurial intention.
The Moderating Effects of Gender and Academic Discipline
We anticipated that gender and academic discipline would contextualize how extraversion interacts with environmental resources to predict entrepreneurial intention. Social role theory (Eagly & Wood, 2012) explains gendered disparities, such that societal expectations encourage men to prioritize instrumental goals, like venture growth, and perceive entrepreneurship as a socially endorsed career path, whereas women often face implicit biases in resource allocation despite holding comparable competency (Jennings & Brush, 2013; Kruse & Marquardt, 2024). Consistent with ecological systems theory, gender disparities reflect macrosystemic cultural norms, such as gender role expectations, while disciplinary differences emerge from mesosystemic peer collaborations and macrosystemic resource allocation policies. Men, for instance, consistently report stronger entrepreneurial intention due to higher risk tolerance and institutional legitimacy (Duong & Vu, 2024). These dynamics align with the macrolevel institutional systems in ecological systems theory, wherein cultural norms and policy biases shape resource accessibility, thereby moderating the impact of extraversion.
Discipline-specific training further modulates these pathways. Applied fields, such as engineering and education, embed entrepreneurial skill development through industry-aligned curricula (Pham et al., 2024). Engineering students, for example, leverage prototyping laboratories and venture competitions to transform technical expertise into viable ventures, a process amplified by institutionalized resources (Manning et al., 2024; Nabi et al., 2017). In contrast, theoretical disciplines often lack such supports, constraining students’ abilities to mobilize social networks or funding (Walter & Block, 2016). This disciplinary divide underscores how mesolevel social systems, such as peer collaborations, and macrolevel institutional structures, such as departmental policies, interact to amplify or inhibit trait-driven entrepreneurial intention formation. Thus, we proposed the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4: Gender and academic discipline will moderate the mediating effects of perceived social support and institutional resources on the relationship between extraversion and entrepreneurial intention.
The conceptual model of this research is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Conceptual Model of Dual Mediation
Method
Participants and Procedure
We collected data through paper-based surveys completed by 632 undergraduate students from Shaanxi Preschool Teachers’ College, a public institution offering programs in science, engineering, education, arts, management, law, and history. Participants were recruited through stratified classroom sampling covering all departments, and entrepreneurship event outreach (e.g., business plan competitions) between October 2023 and March 2024, to ensure representation of both general and entrepreneurship-engaged populations.
The final sample included 589 valid responses, yielding a response rate of 88.5%, with the gender distribution (women = 68%, men = 32%) and disciplinary diversity aligning with the college’s program enrollment ratios: education (27%), engineering (19%), arts (15%), management (14%), science (12%), law (9%), and history (4%). All participants were undergraduates aged 18–24 years (M = 20.3, SD = 1.5). To address potential disciplinary sample-size disparities (e.g., history majors at 4%), we conducted sensitivity analyses to confirm robust mediation effects across subgroups.
The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Shaanxi Preschool Teachers’ College (SXTC-IRB-2023-1205). Participants provided written informed consent and took part in the research on a voluntary basis. Anonymous data processing and the right to withdraw were emphasized. No incentives were provided to participants in order to minimize response bias.
Measures
All constructs were measured using scales adapted to the Chinese cultural context through a back-translation process (Brislin, 1986). Two bilingual experts independently translated the original English scales into Chinese, then these were back-translated into English by two additional experts. Discrepancies, such as idioms or culturally specific terms, were resolved through group discussion to ensure semantic equivalence. Responses were recorded on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.
We conducted a pilot study (N = 50 students from the target population) to assess the psychometric properties of the adapted scale. Results indicated high reliability for all scales: extraversion (α = .86), entrepreneurial intention (α = .92), PSS (α = .94), and institutional resources (α = .85). Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated adequate factorial validity, χ2/df = 1.89, root-mean-square error of approximation = .06, comparative fit index = .95, Tucker–Lewis index = .93, standardized root-mean-square residual = .04.
Extraversion
The eight-item extraversion subscale was adapted from the Chinese Big Five Inventory (Zhang et al., 2019), a culturally validated version of the original Big Five Inventory-44 (Carciofo et al., 2016). The scale assesses traits such as sociability (e.g., “I enjoy initiating conversations in new social settings”), assertiveness (e.g., “I confidently express my opinions in group discussions”), and enthusiasm (e.g., “I actively participate in campus events”).
To enhance cultural relevance for Chinese undergraduates, we modified two items to reflect localized social behaviors. For instance, the Western-centric statement “I am the life of the party” was replaced with “I enjoy interacting with diverse student groups”; this aligns with collectivist norms emphasizing group harmony over individual prominence. For this eight-item scale, Cronbach’s alpha was .86.
Entrepreneurial Intention
We employed a 10-item scale adapted from Liñán and Chen (2009) to measure two theoretically distinct dimensions: goal intention, which captures long-term commitment to venture creation (five items, e.g., “I am determined to start a business within 3 years of graduation”) and execution intention, which assesses concrete planning behaviors (five items, e.g., “I have identified potential partners and funding sources for my venture”).
To predict contextual relevance for Chinese undergraduates, three items were modified to reflect localized entrepreneurial pathways. For example, “I will make every effort to start my own firm” was revised to “I will leverage campus entrepreneurship programs and alumni networks to launch my business,” emphasizing institutionally embedded resource mobilization.
This dual-dimensional structure aligns with ecological systems theory, where goal intention reflects microlevel trait activation, while execution intention embodies mesolevel or macrolevel resource engagement (Manning et al., 2024). The total entrepreneurial intention scores showed excellent reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha being .92.
Perceived Social Support
The 12-item Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (Zimet et al., 1988) was adapted to assess mesolevel relational resources critical for entrepreneurial intention. The scale measures three contextually salient support sources in Chinese higher education: familial support, which assesses emotional and instrumental backing from family (four items, e.g., “My family encourages me to pursue entrepreneurial opportunities even if it delays graduation”), peer support, which measures collaborative networks among classmates and friends (four items, e.g., “My peers share business ideas and market insights with me”), and mentorship, which assesses guidance from faculty advisors and industry experts (four items, e.g., “My professors connect me with alumni entrepreneurs for advice”).
The original significant others subscale was reframed as being mentorship, to align with Chinese academic hierarchies, where professional teacher–student relationships hold central importance. We also added two items to reflect digital support channels (e.g., “I receive entrepreneurial advice through WeChat mentorship groups”), capturing technology-mediated ecosystems. For this scale, internal reliability was strong, with Cronbach’s alpha being .94.
Institutional Resources
We developed a 12-item scale to assess macrolevel institutional resources, integrating dimensions from Nabi et al. (2017) and Walter and Block (2016) within the ecosystem framework to measure three core aspects of institutional support in Chinese higher education: entrepreneurship education (e.g., “My university provides mandatory courses with real business case studies”), funding accessibility (e.g., “The university clearly publicizes startup grant application procedures”), and structured mentorship systems (e.g., “Faculty advisors are formally assigned to student venture teams for at least one academic year”). To ensure cultural relevance, items emphasized state-sponsored resources, such as government youth entrepreneurship funds and institutionalized mentorship hierarchies, reflecting the policy-driven entrepreneurial ecosystem in China.
Scale development followed a rigorous three-stage process. An initial pool of 20 items was generated through literature synthesis and focus groups with entrepreneurship educators. These items underwent expert review via the Delphi method, where five scholars and three incubator managers rated relevance, retaining 12 items with content validity ratios exceeding .75. Psychometric validation through pilot testing confirmed a robust three-factor structure, root-mean-square error of approximation = .06, standardized root-mean-square residual = .04, composite reliability = .89–.93, aligning with the theoretical delineation of institutional resource dimensions.
Control Variables
We controlled for three variables to isolate the extraversion–entrepreneurial intention relationship: gender (i.e., 0 = women, 1 = men), reflecting societal role expectations under ecological systems theory; academic discipline, categorized into 1 = applied fields (i.e., engineering, education, management) versus 0 = theoretical fields (i.e., arts, science, law, history) to account for institutionally embedded resource disparities; and prior entrepreneurship exposure, a binary measure (i.e., 0 = no, 1 = yes) based on self-reported participation in business plan competitions or venture internships. This categorization aligns with China’s higher education policy frameworks, where applied disciplines receive prioritized entrepreneurial resource allocation.
Data Analysis
We analyzed data using SPSS 22.0 and Mplus 7.0 within an ecosystem framework. Structural equation modeling was used to test the hypotheses with maximum likelihood estimation. The covariates of gender, academic discipline, and prior entrepreneurship exposure were included by regressing them on the dependent variable. Missing data (2.3%) were handled using full information maximum likelihood.
We assessed mediation effects via bias-corrected bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples, with significance determined by 95% confidence intervals (CIs) excluding zero (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). Multigroup structural equation modeling was adopted to examine moderation by gender and discipline, with interaction terms created from standardized variables. Sensitivity analyses included comparing nested models (i.e., the χ² difference test) and testing alternative pathways. Robust standard errors confirmed stable estimates across subgroups.
Results
Common Method Bias
We conducted Harman’s single-factor test to check for common method bias.
Six factors were extracted with eigenvalues greater than 1, and the first factor accounted for 32.1% of the total variance, which is below the common threshold of 40%, suggesting that common method bias was unlikely to be a serious concern in this study.
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations
Descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients among extraversion, PSS, institutional resources, and entrepreneurial intention are summarized in Table 1. As shown, all variables exhibited positive correlations, providing preliminary evidence supporting the hypothesized mediation model.
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Among Study Variables
Note. N = 589.
** p < .01. *** p < .001.
Measurement Model Evaluation
The measurement model demonstrated satisfactory reliability and convergent validity, exceeding commonly recommended thresholds (Cronbach’s α > .70, composite reliability > .70, average variance extracted > .50). These results are shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Reliability and Validity of Measurement Model
Note. CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted.
Structural Model and Mediation Analysis
Structural equation modeling demonstrated good fit indices, comparative fit index = .96, Tucker–Lewis index = .95, root-mean-square error of approximation = .04, standardized root-mean-square residual = .05. As shown in Table 3, extraversion directly and significantly predicted entrepreneurial intention. Additionally, PSS and institutional resources significantly mediated the relationship between extraversion and entrepreneurial intention, supporting the dual mediation hypotheses. Bootstrapped mediation analysis further supported the significant indirect effects of PSS and institutional resources in the relationship between extraversion and entrepreneurial intention.
Table 3. Structural Model Path Coefficients and Mediation Analysis Results
Note. CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.
Moderating Effects of Gender and Academic Discipline
Moderation analysis revealed significant moderated mediation effects. For instance, gender moderated the institutional resources mediation pathway, β = .18, 95% CI [0.07, 0.29], with a stronger indirect relationship between extraversion and entrepreneurial intention via institutional resources found for men compared to women, Δβ = .24, p < .001. Further, academic discipline moderated the PSS mediation pathway, β = .15, 95% CI [0.04, 0.26], where applied disciplines showed stronger indirect effects through PSS than theoretical fields, Δβ = .19, p = .003. These effects, illustrated in Figure 2 with significant slope differences (all ps < .01), highlight the necessity of gender- and discipline-tailored entrepreneurship program designs.
Figure 2. Moderating Effects of Gender and Academic Discipline on the Relationship Between Extraversion and Entrepreneurial Intention
Discussion
This study has contributed to entrepreneurial intention research by applying ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) to examine the dual mediating roles of PSS and institutional resources in the relationship between extraversion and entrepreneurial intention among college students.
First, extraversion directly predicted entrepreneurial intention, which is consistent with previous studies highlighting extraversion as a key trait driving entrepreneurial intention (Obschonka et al., 2012; Zhao et al., 2010). This supports Holland’s (1997) theory, suggesting a natural fit between extraverted individuals and socially interactive entrepreneurial roles.
Second, we found that PSS significantly mediated the extraversion–entrepreneurial intention link. Extraverted individuals leverage broad social networks for emotional and instrumental support, which reduces perceived barriers and enhances entrepreneurial self-efficacy (Davidsson & Honig, 2003; Stam et al., 2014). Such trait–environment interactions align closely with ecological systems theory.
Third, this research systematically examined institutional resources, such as entrepreneurship education and funding, as a mediator for the first time. Moving beyond prior static frameworks (Nabi et al., 2017; Walter & Block, 2016), our finding of a significant mediating effect illustrates how extraverted students proactively exploit institutional supports, turning them into dynamic environmental catalysts, consistent with the reciprocal interactions of ecological systems theory (Manning et al., 2024).
Additionally, exploratory analysis indicated significant moderating effects of gender and academic discipline. Men and those from applied fields exhibited stronger entrepreneurial intention, which is consistent with social role theory (Eagly & Wood, 2012) and resource dependence theory (Reitz, 1979). These differences reflect structural disparities in resource allocation, suggesting targeted institutional support is needed.
Our findings challenge universities to adopt ecosystem-driven approaches. For applied disciplines, targeted funding and incubators may optimize entrepreneurial intention development, while theoretical fields could prioritize peer mentorship networks. By synthesizing personality psychology and institutional analysis, this study provides a dynamic framework for cultivating entrepreneurial intention across diverse academic contexts.
Practical Contributions
The findings offer actionable strategies for universities to cultivate entrepreneurial intention. First, we found that applied disciplines benefited most from institutional resources like incubators and funding access, suggesting the need for targeted investments in infrastructure for these fields. Conversely, humanities students relied more on peer mentorship networks; thus, universities should strengthen collaborative platforms for these majors. Second, gender disparities in resource accessibility underscore the need for policy reforms. For instance, creating entrepreneurship grants for women would help to counter implicit biases. Third, integrating training programs to enhance skills aligned with extraversion (e.g., leadership workshops for networking and assertive communication) could amplify students’ social engagement and resource mobilization. By aligning institutional offerings with personality and disciplinary needs, universities can foster inclusive entrepreneurial ecosystems.
Limitations and Future Research
This study has several limitations. First, the use of a cross-sectional design precludes drawing causal inferences. While we identified mediation pathways, the bidirectional effects between traits and environments remain untested. Second, despite Harman’s single-factor test indicating minimal common method bias, reliance on self-reported data risks inflating correlations. Future studies could adopt multiwave designs or marker-variable techniques to enhance rigor. Third, the sample was drawn from a single Chinese college, limiting generalizability to diverse cultural or institutional contexts. Finally, we focused on undergraduate students, which may have overlooked variations in entrepreneurial intention across career stages, such as alumni or working professionals.
Three avenues warrant further exploration. First, longitudinal studies could unravel how institutional resources, such as mentorship programs, reciprocally relate to extraversion over time, testing Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) bidirectional interaction hypothesis. Second, cross-cultural comparisons are critical, for example, contrasting collectivist (e.g., China) and individualist (e.g., the United States) contexts to examine how cultural norms modulate the trait–resource–entrepreneurial intention linkages. Third, gender disparities in entrepreneurial intention demand deeper inquiry. Qualitative methods could uncover how implicit biases in resource allocation hinder students who are women, while interventions like role model exposure might mitigate these gaps. Finally, future work could explore the intention–behavior gap by tracking how entrepreneurial intention translates into venture creation, particularly in resource-constrained environments. By addressing these gaps, researchers can refine the application of ecological systems theory to entrepreneurship, while equipping institutions with evidence-based strategies to nurture diverse entrepreneurial talent.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674028845
Carciofo, R., Yang, J., Song, N., Du, F., & Zhang, K. (2016). Psychometric evaluation of Chinese-language 44-item and 10-item Big Five Personality Inventories, including correlations with chronotype, mindfulness and mind wandering. PLOS One, 11(2), Article e0149963. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149963
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 310–357. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310
Crawford, M. (2020). Ecological systems theory: Exploring the development of the theoretical framework as conceived by Bronfenbrenner. Journal of Public Health Issues and Practices, 4(2), Article 170. https://doi.org/10.33790/jphip1100170
Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003). The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 301–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00097-6
Duong, C. D., & Vu, N. X. (2024). Entrepreneurial education and intention: Fear of failure, self-efficacy and gender. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 31(4), 629–654. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-02-2023-0057
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Lange, E. T. Higgins, & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 458–476). Sage Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n49
Haque, M. R., & Kour, M. (2024). Exploring the growth and future research direction of entrepreneurial self-efficacy in entrepreneurial intention research: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15(3), 12392–12421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01578-1
Hmieleski, K. M., & Baron, R. A. (2009). Entrepreneurs’ optimism and new venture performance: A social cognitive perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 473–488. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.41330755
Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Psychological Assessment Resources.
Huang, Z., & Kee, D. M. H. (2024). Exploring entrepreneurial intention: The roles of proactive personality, education, opportunity and planned behavior. Heliyon, 10(11), Article e31714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31714
Jennings, J. E., & Brush, C. G. (2013). Research on women entrepreneurs: Challenges to (and from) the broader entrepreneurship literature? Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 663–715. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2013.782190
Kickul, J., Gundry, L. K., Barbosa, S. D., & Whitcanack, L. (2009). Intuition versus analysis? Testing differential models of cognitive style on entrepreneurial self–efficacy and the new venture creation process. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(2), 439–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00298.x
Kruse, P., & Marquardt, J. (2024). How does gender self-stereotyping influence entrepreneurial intention formation?—An empirical investigation of nascent commercial and social entrepreneurs. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 33(4), 862–896. https://doi.org/10.1177/09713557241306878
Liang, J., Wang, H., & Lazear, E. P. (2020). Demographics and entrepreneurship. Journal of Political Economy, 126(S1), S140–S196. https://doi.org/10.1086/698750
Liñán, F., & Chen, Y.-W. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00318.x
Liñán, F., Jaén, I., & Rodríguez, M. J. (2024). Gender and sex in starting up: A social stereotype approach. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 36(3–4), 243–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2023.2295266
Manning, S., Rauch, M., & Vavilov, S. (2024). Creating complementarities: How entrepreneurs mobilize crowdfunding and local ecosystems. Strategic Organization, 22(4), 734–766. https://doi.org/10.1177/14761270221094800
Nabi, G., Liñán, F., Fayolle, A., Krueger, N., & Walmsley, A. (2017). The impact of entrepreneurship education in higher education: A systematic review and research agenda. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16(2), 277–299. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2015.0026
Obschonka, M., Silbereisen, R. K., & Schmitt-Rodermund, E. (2012). Explaining entrepreneurial behavior: Dispositional personality traits, growth of personal entrepreneurial resources, and business idea generation. The Career Development Quarterly, 60(2), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2012.00015.x
Pham, M., Lam, B. Q., & Tuan Ngoc Bui, A. T. N. (2024). Career exploration and its influence on the relationship between self-efficacy and career choice: The moderating role of social support. Heliyon, 10(11), Article e31808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31808
Piperopoulos, P., & Dimov, D. (2015). Burst bubbles or build steam? Entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(4), 970–985. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12116
Ralph, A., & Arora, A. (2023). A bibliometric study of reference literature on youth unemployment. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 17(6), 1338–1367. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-04-2022-0062
Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2007). Let’s put the person back into entrepreneurship research: A meta-analysis on the relationship between business owners’ personality traits, business creation, and success. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 16(4), 353–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320701595438
Reitz, H. J. (1979). Review of The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective, by J. Pfeffer & G. R. Salancik. Academy of Management Review, 4(2), 309–310. https://doi.org/10.2307/257794
Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A. (2002). The Big Five personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 789–801. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202289008
Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982). The social dimensions of entrepreneurship. Social Science Research Network.
Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S., & Al-Laham, A. (2007). Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4), 566–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.05.002
Stam, W., Arzlanian, S., & Elfring, T. (2014). Social capital of entrepreneurs and small firm performance: A meta-analysis of contextual and methodological moderators. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 152–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.01.002
St-Jean, E., & Audet, J. (2012). The role of mentoring in the learning development of the novice entrepreneur. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8(1), 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-009-0130-7
Thompson, E. R. (2009). Individual entrepreneurial intent: Construct clarification and development of an internationally reliable metric. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 669–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00321.x
Walter, S. G., & Block, J. H. (2016). Outcomes of entrepreneurship education: An institutional perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(2), 216–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.10.003
Wang, P., Sun, W., & Zhong, Q. (2023). The relationship between college students’ extraversion and entrepreneurial intention: The mediating role of perceived social support. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 51(11), Article e12750. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.12750
Wilson, F., Kickul, J., & Marlino, D. (2007). Gender, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: Implications for entrepreneurship education. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(3), 387–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00179.x
Xie, H., Kuang, W., Liu, Y., & Xu, C. (2025). Configurational pathways to entrepreneurial persistence: Unpacking the synergistic effects of environment, motivation, and energy. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 33(2), 155–191. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218495825500074
Zhang, X., Wang, M.-C., He, L., Jie, L., & Deng, J. (2019). The development and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory-15. PLOS One, 14(8), Article e0221621. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221621
Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2010). The relationship of personality to entrepreneurial intentions and performance: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36(2), 381–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309335187
Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2
Figure 1. Conceptual Model of Dual Mediation
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Among Study Variables
Note. N = 589.
** p < .01. *** p < .001.
Table 2. Reliability and Validity of Measurement Model
Note. CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted.
Table 3. Structural Model Path Coefficients and Mediation Analysis Results
Note. CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.
Figure 2. Moderating Effects of Gender and Academic Discipline on the Relationship Between Extraversion and Entrepreneurial Intention
This work was supported by the Research Foundation of the Education Bureau of Shaanxi Province, China (21JP028, 20JZ035), the 2025 Annual Special Research Project on Philosophy and Social Sciences in Shaanxi Province (2025YB0115), the 2025 Annual Social Sciences Planning Fund Project of Xi’an City (25JY47), the Modern Educational Technology Curriculum and Teaching Team for Pedagogical Education with Ideological and Political Education Demonstration of Shaanxi Xueqian Normal University, and the Youth Innovation Team of Shaanxi Universities (Social Development and Education of Children).
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author.
Mingjun Li, College of Education and Science, Shaanxi Xueqian Normal University, Xi’an, 710061, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China. Email: [email protected]
Article Details
© 2026 Scientific Journal Publishers Limited. All Rights Reserved.