The Mediating Effects of Entrepreneurship Intention on the Relationship Between Perceived Behavior Control and Startup Preparation: An Empirical Study in a Selected University in Sri Lanka

N Thevanes
Lecturer (Probationary), Trincomalee Campus, Eastern University, Sri Lanka. E-mail: nadesthev@gmail.com

Literature reveals that how entrepreneurship intention mediates the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation has not been empirically tested in the Sri Lankan context. Hence, this paper aims to examine the relationship among perceived behavioral control, entrepreneurship intention, and startup preparation as well as the mediating effect of entrepreneurship intention on the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation. To achieve the study objectives, primary data was collected from 60 postgraduates from a selected state university in Sri Lanka. Simple mediation analysis was used to test the research model. The findings of the study reveal that positive and significant relationships exist among the study variables. Furthermore, the empirical finding of the study indicated that entrepreneurship intention mediates the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation. The current study is considered vital in understanding the empirical knowledge regarding the relationships among perceived behavioral control, entrepreneurship intention, and startup preparation.

Introduction
In the recent past, entrepreneurial development has become a critical factor. It is considered a key feature of economic development since it contributes to reducing the unemployment rate, inequality, and poverty. The core conservation of economic resources, namely, land, labor, and capital, lies in entrepreneurship (Mariotti and Glacklin, 2014). At the country level, entrepreneurs are considered to be valuable human capital who can combine other resources such as land, labor, and capital to produce goods and services to contribute to the wealth creation of the country as well as to ensure the standard of living of the people by introducing quality and innovative products. Hence, wealth creation, economic development, and entrepreneurship are considered interdependent and integrated concepts (Mariotti and Glacklin, 2014).

Developing countries, in particular, are facing a strong necessity to accelerate the entrepreneurial culture by creating a positive entrepreneurial mindset among their human resources to lead the country towards economic development. Further, it is revealed that countries with a strong entrepreneurial culture recorded a high level of economic development. For instance, developed countries such as the United States, Switzerland, and Canada occupy the first three places, according to the global entrepreneurship index. According to Kumar (2012), the role of an entrepreneur would be innovative and generate economic opportunities for others, while the role of government and its partners would be establishing a dynamic enterprise environment and well-functioning market for the entrepreneurs.

In the Sri Lankan context, entrepreneurs have become the seeds of development providing greater opportunities and increasing per capita income and revenue to the government by way of taxes and other levies. Furthermore, Sri Lanka is ranked 101 according to the global entrepreneurship index (2019). As a result, the Sri Lankan government is concentrating more on creating, developing, and implementing several policies, strategies, initiatives, and practices for the country's entrepreneurial development. Education plays a critical role in the development of enterprising citizens. Education, according to policymakers, is believed to increase the levels of entrepreneurship (European Commission, 2006). Sri Lankan universities have been introducing several entrepreneurial study programs to undergraduates and postgraduate students considering the global trend and acknowledging the importance of educating entrepreneurs. These educational programs are expected to fulfill the gap that prevent many graduates and postgraduates from aspiring to become entrepreneurs. Those completing the entrepreneurial education programs will be able to start a new entrepreneurial venture with sound knowledge, adequate skills, and positive attitudes.

In this sense, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention are considered essential components for commencing a new venture or a business (Mamun et al., 2017; and Rodrigues et al., 2019). Therefore, universities devote attention to designing educational programs that improve the perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurship intentions among the students. Many scholars have conducted research studies regarding the entrepreneurship intention of students (Franke and Luthje, 2004; Olufunso, 2010; Keat et al., 2011; Fayolle and Linan, 2014; Kuttim et al., 2014; Solesvik et al., 2014; and Storen, 2014).

Several researchers have studied the relationship between perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurship intention (Autio et al., 2001; Gelderen et al., 2008; Linan and Chen, 2009; Gelard and Saleh, 2011; Paco et al., 2011; Ferreira et al., 2012; and Rodrigues et al., 2019). Only a few studies, however, have examined the relationship among perceived behavioral control, entrepreneurial intention, and startup preparation (Mamun et al., 2017). Likewise, in Sri Lanka, anecdotal evidence reveals that identically few research works have been undertaken in this area. Additionally, there is an absence of empirical evidence in the Sri Lankan context on the relationship among perceived behavioral control, entrepreneurial intention, and startup preparation. It is essential to encourage the university learners as entrepreneurs to ensure the country's economic prosperity. Reflecting on the above reasons, the author aims to fulfill the empirical and contextual gaps of relationship among perceived behavioral control, entrepreneurship intention, and startup preparation in selected university postgraduate students.

Therefore, it necessitates systematic research to explore and highlight the above aspects. Based on the above research background and generally observed empirical knowledge gap, the following four objectives are formulated:

• To explain the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation among postgraduate students in a selected state university of Sri Lanka.
• To explain the relationship between perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention among postgraduate students in a selected state university of Sri Lanka.
• To explain the relationship between entrepreneurial intention and startup preparation among postgraduate students in a selected state university of Sri Lanka.
• To explain the mediating effect of entrepreneurial intention on the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation among postgraduate students in a selected state university of Sri Lanka.

Literature Review and Hypotheses Formulation
Relationship Between Perceived Behavioral Control and Startup Preparation
Perceived behavioral control refers to the perceived difficulty or ease of performing a specific behavior, depending on the availability and accessibility of self-capability, information, knowledge, and other resources required by an individual to perform a definite behavior (Ajzen, 1991). According to Ajzen (1991, p. 183), resources and opportunities available to a person must dictate the likelihood of behavioral achievement. If an individual needs to foster a specific behavior, they require exercise, to a sufficient degree, of actual and perceived control over the behavior and its outcome (Autio et al., 2001). Linan and Chen (2009) defined perceived behavioral control in this perspective as the perception of ease or difficulty associated with being an entrepreneur, including the feeling of being able and the perception of one's extent to control one's behavior. In this context, an entrepreneur must be offered opportunities and compulsory resources to start a business or venture. The ability of an individual to initiate a new venture often depends on external factors, such as availability of funding and resources, presence of opportunity, and the perceived and actual competencies of the individual (Autio et al., 2001). Governments that focus more on promoting economic development must expand the pool of enterprising individuals who discover and create entrepreneurial knowledge and technology-based opportunities (European Commission, 2012). The government needs to focus more on creating a positive entrepreneurship environment by generating entrepreneurship opportunities and providing adequate resources to ensure the country's economic prosperity. Entrepreneurs must believe that it is easy to start a business or venture in the country. Gnyawali and Fogel (1994) found that governments could enhance entrepreneurship by assistance programs such as tax and other incentives, as well as easy trade rules and regulations, thereby ensuring an entrepreneurship-positive environment. Further, Manun et al. (2017) claimed that entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurship development programs, support from family, and government support positively and significantly impact students' perceived behavior control and contribute to fostering the aspirations to start a new business or venture. According to the available; literature, this review establishes that perceived behavior has a positive relationship with startup preparation as the first hypothesis of this review:

H1: There is a positive relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation.

Relationship Between Perceived Behavioral Control and Entrepreneurial Intention
Entrepreneurial intention refers to the subjective probability that a person becomes self-employed after completing their studies (Dohse and Walter, 2010). According to Solesvik et al. (2014), an individual's intention to become an entrepreneur requires the action event to be perceived as desirable. For example, entrepreneurship educational programs strengthen the students' entrepreneurial competencies and attitudes, which help in enhancing students' entrepreneurial intentions. Intentions are central to understanding the process of venturing into a business and are perceived as the first step in the startup of an enterprise (Astorga and Martynez, 2014). Gelard and Saleh (2011) proved that perceived behavioral control is a powerful predictor of entrepreneurship intention. Further, Kolvereid (1996) argued that the greater a person's perceived behavioral control, the stronger that person would intend to become self-employed.

Perceived behavioral control, which encompasses both the individual's actual control of the behavior and one's perceptions regarding this control, is persuaded by the above-mentioned intention. The perceived behavioral control accordingly captures both the actual situation as well as the individual's expectations for the behavior's effectiveness (Autio et al., 2001). Improving students' perceived behavioral control keenly contributes to shaping and reshaping students' entrepreneurship intention and inspiring the more competent to pursue an entrepreneurial career. Recognizing the importance of entrepreneurship, governments turn their spotlight on enhancing the entrepreneurial abilities (knowledge of entrepreneurship, technical skills, business management skills, personal entrepreneurial skills), creating opportunities (creating a positive entrepreneurial climate), and motivating students (encourage new startups and other entrepreneurial ventures) to improve their perceived behavioral control, which leads to shaping and reshaping their entrepreneurial intentions to create and sustain an entrepreneurial culture within the country. Several empirical studies confirm the relationship between perceived behavioral control and students' entrepreneurial intention in this setting (Autio et al., 2001; Luthje and Franke, 2004; Linan and Chen, 2009; Dohse and Walter, 2010; Paco et al., 2011; Ferreira et al., 2012; and Rodrigues et al., 2019). Further, government and family support play a significant role in improving the perceived behavioral control to foster the entrepreneurship intention among students. Thus it establishes that perceived behavioral control has a positive relationship with entrepreneurial intention:

H2: There is a positive relationship between perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention.

Relationship Between Entrepreneurship Intention and Startup Preparation
As per the Theory of Planned Behavior, intention has a direct relationship with actual behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Entrepreneurial intention represents the Theory of Planned Behavior's intention construct, whereas startup preparation represents the behavior construct (Ajzen, 1991). Given that an individual's decision to become an entrepreneur is voluntary and conscious, Krueger et al. (2000) argued that entrepreneurship intention is the crucial factor in determining the startup preparation of a new entrepreneurial venture. The entrepreneurial intention is a conscious state of mind that directs attention and so, experience and action, toward a specific purpose or pathway to achieve it (Hamidi et al., 2008). This definition visibly states that entrepreneurship intention leads to starting a new business or venture. Generally, people who have entrepreneurial intentions are more committed and willing to engage in preparation works to start a new venture or business rather than job seekers. Therefore, a person with firm entrepreneurship intention will take the necessary steps to start the entrepreneurial venture or business. In this setting, several studies have revealed that entrepreneurship intention is a primary predictor of future entrepreneurial behavior (Katz, 1988; Reynolds, 1995; and Krueger et al., 2000). Thus, it establishes that entrepreneurial intention has a positive relationship with startup preparation of a business or venture, and the third hypothesis is:

H3: There is a positive relationship between entrepreneurial intention and startup preparation.

The Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Intention in the Relationship Between Perceived Behavioral Control and Startup Preparation
The mediating variable is the one that surfaces between the time the independent variable begins operating to influence the dependent variable and the time the impact is felt (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013). Based on the above-cited literature evidence, it is possible to establish a positive direct relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation. Mamun et al. (2014) stated that perceived behavioral control plays a significant role in determining startup preparation under the situation. Additionally, Krueger et al. (2000) revealed that entrepreneurial intention leads to startup preparation. Therefore, it is logically and empirically discovered that perceived behavioral control positively stirs startup preparation by shaping and reshaping individuals' entrepreneurship intention. Therefore, perceived behavioral control is the independent variable, whereas startup preparation is the dependent variable. Entrepreneurship intention plays a mediating role in the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation. Based on the above arguments, we can mold the entrepreneurial intention of students by improving the perceived behavioral control, which drives involvement with the startup preparations to start a new venture or business. Based on the literature, it can be established that entrepreneurial intention mediates the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation as the fourth hypothesis of this review:

H4: Entrepreneurial intention mediates the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation.

Hence, based on the review, this study proposes a conceptual framework that shows the relationship among perceived behavioral control, entrepreneurial intention, and startup preparation (see Figure 1).

Theories Related to This Study
AMO Theory
Ability, Motivation, and Opportunity (AMO) theory was initially developed by Appelbaum et al. (2000). AMO theory suggests that individuals' performance depends on abilities, motivation, and opportunities. In empirical studies, this theory is one of the most commonly used conceptualizations of the impact of HRM practices on organizational performance (Boselie et al., 2005). The researcher has used Ability-Motivation-Opportunity (AMO) theory (Appelbaum et al., 2000) to identify the key factors that will have an impact on perceived behavior control. Perceived behavioral control refers to the perceived difficulty or ease of performing a definite behavior, depending on the availability and accessibility of self-capability, information, knowledge, and other resources required by an individual to perform an assured behavior (Ajzen, 1991). The researcher applied this theory to enhance the perceived behavioral control concerning entrepreneurship. Based on the AMO theory, the author of this paper predicts that the students' perceived behavioral control depends on the students' abilities, motivation, and opportunities regarding entrepreneurship. Here, abilities are defined as the students' competencies to participate in entrepreneurial activities successfully. Abilities include students' overall entrepreneurship knowledge and skills. The author argues that intrinsic and extrinsic motivations pave the way to be an entrepreneur. In this study, an opportunity is defined as the government's part to improve students' participation and involvement in entrepreneurial activities. Governments can enhance entrepreneurship through assistance policies, namely, tax reduction and other incentives, along with relaxed trade rules and regulations. Based on the AMO theory, this study developed the conceptual model (Figure 2).

Theory of Planned Behavior
The Theory of Planned Behavior aided the theoretical foundation of this study. The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) was proposed by Ajzen (1991). After nearly half a century of development and applications in various fields, TPB has been broadly recognized by researchers. TPB is a psycho-cognitive theory that explains the prediction of a particular behavior or the intention to behave in a way. The theory proposes intention is a powerful predictor of behavior. According to Ajzen (1991), a person's intention to perform the behaviors can be predicted. Further, the theory suggested that attitude toward the behavior, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control together impact intention. Adopting TPB as a conceptual framework for examining entrepreneurial intention is the choice of a growing number of studies (Autio et al., 2001; Linan and Chen 2009; Paco et al., 2011; and Ferreira et al., 2012) and is also the basis of this study. Furthermore, entrepreneurial intention represents the TPB's intention construct, whereas startup preparation represents the behavior construct (Ajzen, 1991). Hence, TPB is appropriate to underpin the conceptual framework of this study.

System Theory
The system theory, developed originally by Bertalanffy, explains how something can be materialized through taking inputs, processing and giving outputs (Arulrajah and Opatha, 2016). The system theory is useful in providing a framework to study how complex variables influence one another. Therefore, the researcher developed the conceptual framework by adapting the open system model of system theory. This theory provides strong support for the framework given in Figure 3. Based on the systematic perspective, perceived behavior was the system's input, entrepreneurship intentions were the processing part of the system, and startup preparation was the system's output (see Figure 3). Based on the systematic perspective, perceived behavior control was treated as an input of the system, entrepreneurship intentions were treated as the processing part of the system and finally startup preparation was considered as the output of the system.

Data and Methodology
The empirical data for the current study was collected from 60 postgraduate students from a selected state university in Sri Lanka. The total population of this study is 120 postgraduate students at a selected state university in Sri Lanka. The convenience sampling method was used.

This study is based on primary data. The data for this study was collected from the respondents through a structured questionnaire (see Appendix) which comprised questions relating to perceived behavioral control, entrepreneurial intention, and startup preparation.

Measures
All constructs were measured with multiple items developed and tested in previous studies. Each item was measured on a five-point Likert-type scale having 'strongly disagree' and 'strongly agree' response options.

This study used an instrument adapted from past research work of Lian and Chen (2009). This instrument can be used to measure entrepreneurial intention that consists of eight question items. This instrument had a Cronbach's alpha of 0.83, higher than 0.70. Hence, this instrument had good reliability. Five question items were used from past research works of Lorz (2011) to measure perceived behavioral control. The instrument had a good degree of reliability with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.74. To measure startup preparation, ten-question items were used from past research works of Lorz (2011). The instrument had a good degree of reliability with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.88.

Correlation analysis examines the relationship between the variables (Jahangir and Begum, 2008). According to Sekaran (2000), the correlation coefficient values (r) between 0.10 to 0.29 are considered weak, 0.30 to 0.49 are considered medium, and 0.50 to 1.0 are considered strong. Still, according to Field (2005), the correlation coefficient should not exceed 0.8 to avoid multicollinearity. The correlation matrix shows that multicollinearity does not jeopardize the validity of the data.

To test the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation (H1), perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention (H2), and entrepreneurial intention and startup preparation (H3), correlation analysis was used. In addition, simple mediation analysis was used to examine the mediating effect of entrepreneurial intention on the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation. This method was proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986) and Frazier et al. (2004) to examine the mediating effect. Several regressions were implemented in conducting a simple mediation analysis. The first involved regressing the dependent variable on the independent variable, then the independent variable on mediating variable, and mediating variable on the dependent variable, and finally performing a multiple regression analysis with the independent variable and mediating variable on the dependent variable. Research published by Opatha (2020) also adopted this method to examine the mediating effect of lecturing behavior on the relationship between lecturer's competence and student satisfaction on learning.

Results
Correlation Analysis
Correlation analysis illustrates that perceived behavioral control has a moderate positive correlation with startup preparation. It also shows a strong positive correlation between perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention. Further, it indicates that entrepreneurial intention has a strong positive correlation with startup preparation (Table 1).

Simple Mediation Analysis
Table 2 shows the results of a simple mediation analysis. Step 1 tests the effect of the predictor (perceived behavioral control) on the outcome (startup preparation) (R2 = 0.223, p = 0.000). The results indicate that perceived behavioral control is positively and significantly related to startup preparation.

Step 2 shows that perceived behavioral control is positively and significantly related to entrepreneurship intention (R2 = 0.448, p = 0.000). The results reveal that the predictor is significantly related to the mediator.

The result of step 3 indicates that entrepreneurship intention has a positive relationship with startup preparation (R2 = 0.273, p = 0.00). The results reveal that the mediator is significantly related to the outcome.

Finally, based on the simple mediation analysis, from step 1 to step 3, the relationship between the variables is significant as the Sig value is less than 0.05. In step 4, entrepreneurial intention (0.019) is significant, while perceived behavioral control (0.220) is insignificant. The results of simple mediation analysis suggest that entrepreneurial intention mediates the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation. The analysis provides results to support what was hypothesized in H4.

Discussion
The analyses reveal that a significant and positive relationship exists between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation of a new venture or business. This result provides support to the first hypothesis of this study. The current study outcomes suggest that when students realize the high level of perceived behavioral control, it instantly encourages them to concentrate on startup preparation activities for the new venture. Let us say a student needs to establish a new venture or business. In that case, they need to practice a sufficient level of actual and perceived control over the entrepreneurial behavior and the outcome. In other words, students need entrepreneurial abilities, opportunities to involve with entrepreneurial activities, and motivation to launch a business or venture. In addition to that, students need to be aware of the outcome of the business in advance. Further, this finding is consistent with the prior studies (Manum et al., 2017) that suggested a positive and significant relationship existing between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation.

The results of the analysis further indicate that a significant and positive relationship exists between perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention. This result provides credence to the second hypothesis of this study. The results of this study suggest positive relationship between perceived behavior control and entrepreneurial intention. In other words, universities can improve the perceived behavioral control of students through improving entrepreneurial abilities, creating entrepreneurial opportunities, and motivating them to be entrepreneurs to enhance their entrepreneurship intentions. The findings also serve as empirical evidence for various conceptual and theoretical studies (Autio et al., 2001; Linan and Chen, 2009; Paco et al., 2011; and Ferreira et al., 2012).

The results have shown a significant and positive relationship between entrepreneurship intention and startup preparation. Therefore, governments need to turn their spotlight on creating entrepreneurs via entrepreneurial education programs to create the entrepreneurial culture within the country. Thus, governments and policymakers must enhance the entrepreneurship intentions of students to start a new venture or business to ensure economic prosperity in the country. Because students' intentions towards entrepreneurship are expressed in the form of a new business or venture. Therefore, shaping and reshaping the intentions among university students is treated as an effective and efficient process to have successful entrepreneurs. This finding is consistent with the prior research (Krueger et al., 2000; and Manum et al., 2017), which suggested that a positive and significant relationship exists between entrepreneurship intention and startup preparation.

The empirical finding of this study suggested that entrepreneurial intention plays a mediating role in the relationship between perceived behavior control and startup preparation. This finding is consistent with the theoretical argument of this study. The entrepreneurial intention of students can be improved by enhancing perceived behavior control, which encourages students to involve with the startup preparation of a new venture or business. Theoretical evidence of this study suggested that entrepreneurial intention mediates the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation. Also, the empirical findings of the study verify what was hypothesized in the study. Further, the overall findings of the study completely support and empirically confirm the Theory of Planned Behavior.

Conclusion
The empirical data for this study was collected from 60 postgraduate students from a selected state university in Sri Lanka. Based on the study's empirical findings, there is a positive and significant relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation. Likewise, there are positive and significant relationships between perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurship intention as well as entrepreneurship intention and startup preparation. Moreover, the study's findings revealed that entrepreneurship intention mediates the relationship between perceived behavioral control and startup preparation.

Implications of the Study: For academic research purposes, this study contributes to understanding the relationship among perceived behavioral control, entrepreneurship intention, and startup preparation. Not many studies have been conducted on the relationship among these variables. Therefore, the findings of the study contribute to entrepreneurship literature. The study results also have convenient implications for countries, especially those that want to enhance the entrepreneurship culture among university students.

Limitations and Future Scope: The current study is a cross-sectional study. Therefore, more research is required to validate the existing outcomes in a longitudinal design that might be more appropriate than cross-sectional design for establishing causal inferences based on preexisting theory and empirical data (Chiaburu et al., 2010). Furthermore, the current study employs only a quantitative research design. Therefore, future studies could consider gathering more detailed data from the respondents. Using qualitative and quantitative methods would provide better explanations regarding the relationship among perceived behavioral control, entrepreneurship intention, and startup preparation. Supplementarily, future studies have further opportunities to consider this study's antecedent variables. The study has a methodological limitation because it is undertaken at a single state university in Sri Lanka, which preclude the generalization of the findings. Broader studies are suggested to overcome this limitation. Also, future studies could replicate the proposed model in various universities in Sri Lanka.

References

1. Ajzen I (1991), "The Theory of Planned Behavior", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50, pp. 179-211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
2. Appelbaum E, Bailey T, Berg P and Kalleberg A (2000), Manufacturing Advantage: Why High-Performance Work Systems Pay off, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.
3. Arulrajah A A and Opatha H H D N P (2016), "Analytical and Theoretical Perspectives on Green Human Resource Management: A Simplified Underpinning", International Business Research, Vol. 9, No. 12, pp. 154-164.
4. Astorga P and Martynez D Y (2014), "Entrepreneurial Intention in University Students", Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference of the EuroMed Academy of Business, pp. 704-713.
5. Autio E H, Keeley R, Klofsten M G C, Parker G and Hay M (2001), "Entrepreneurial Intent Among Students in Scandinavia and in the USA", Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 145-160.
6. Baron R and Kenny D A (1986), "The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychology Research: Conceptual, Strategic and Statistical Considerations", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 6 pp. 1173-1182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
7. Boselie J P, Dietz G and Boon C (2005), "Commonalities and Contradictions in HRM and Performance Research", Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 15, pp. 67-94.
8. Boulding K E (1956), "General Systems Theory: The Skeleton of Science", Management Science, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 197-208.
9. Chiaburu D S, Dam K V and Hutchins H M (2010), "Social Support in the Workplace and Training Transfer: A Longitudinal Analysis", International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 187-200.
10. Dohse D and Walter S G (2010), "The Role of Entrepreneurship Education and Regional Context in Forming Entrepreneurial Intentions", Document de treball de l'IEB, Vol. 18, IEB, Barcelona.
11. European Commission (2006), "Entrepreneurship Education in Europe: Fostering Entrepreneurial Mindsets Through Education and Learning", Final Proceedings of the Conference on Entrepreneurship Education in Oslo.
12. European Commission (2012), "Effects and Impact of Entrepreneurship Programmes in Higher Education", European Commission, Brussels.
13. Fayolle A and Linan F (2014), "The Future of Research on Entrepreneurial Intentions", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67, pp. 663-666.
14. Ferreira J J, Raposo M L, Rodrigues R G Dinis A and Paco A (2012), "Model of Entrepreneurial Intention: An Application of the Psychological and Behavioral Approaches", Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 424-440.
15. Field A (2005), Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, (2nd ed), Sage Publication, London.
16. Frank N and Luthje C (2004), "Entrepreneurial Intentions of Business Students - A Benchmarking Study", International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 269-288.
17. Frazier F A, Fix A P and Barron K E (2004), "Testing Moderator and Mediator Effects in Counseling Psychology Research", Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 115-134.
18. Gelard P and Saleh K E (2011), "Impact of Some Contextual Factors on Entrepreneurial Intention of University Students", African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 5, No. 26, pp. 10707-10717.
19. Gelderen M, Brand, M Van Praag M, Bodewes W, Poutsma E and Van Gils A (2008), "Explaining Entrepreneurial Intentions by Means of the Theory of Planned Behavior", Career Development International. Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 538-559.
20. Gnyawali D R and Fogel D S (1994), "Environments for Entrepreneurship Development: Key Dimensions and Research Implications", Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 43-43.
21. Hamidi D, Wennberg K and Berglund H (2008), "Creativity in Entrepreneurship Education", Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 304-320.
22. Jahangir N and Begum N (2008), "The Role of Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, Security and Privacy, and Customer Attitude to Engender Customer Adaptation in the Context of Electronic Banking", African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 32-40.
23. Katz J A (1988), "Intentions, Hurdles, and Startups: An Analysis of Entrepreneurial Follow-Through", Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, Babson College, Wellesley, MA.
24. Katz D and Kahn R L (1978), The Social Psychology of Organizations, Wiley, New York.
25. Keat O Y, Selvarajah C and Meyer D (2011), "Inclination Towards Entrepreneurship Among University Students: An Empirical Study of Malaysian University Students", International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 206-220.
26. Kolvereid L (1996), "Prediction of Employment Status Choice Intentions", Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 21, pp. 47-57.
27. Krueger N F, Reilly M D and Carsrud A L (2000), "Competing Models of Entrepreneurial Intentions", Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 15, Nos. 5-6, pp. 411-432.
28. Kumar A (2012), Entrepreneurship: Creating and Leading an Entrepreneurial Organization, Pearson Education India.
29. Kuttim M, Kallaste M, Venesaar U and Kiis A (2014), "Entrepreneurship Education at University Level and Students' Entrepreneurial Intentions", Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 110, pp. 658-668.
30. Linan F and Chen Y (2009), "Development and Cross-Cultural Application of a Specific Instrument to Measure Entrepreneurial Intentions", Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 593-561.
31. Lorz M (2011), "The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Intention", PhD dissertation, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland.
32. Luthje C and Franke N (2004), "Entrepreneurial Intentions of Business Students: A Benchmarking Study", International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 269-288.
33. Mamun A, Nawi N B C, Mohiuddin M, Shamsudin S M F F B and Fazal S A (2017), "Entrepreneurial Intention and Startup Preparation: A Study Among Business Students in Malaysia", Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 92, No. 6, pp. 296-314, DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2017.1365682
34. Mariotti S and Glackin C (2014), Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management, Pearson Higher Ed.
35. Mele C, Pels J and Polese F (2010), "A Brief Review of Systems Theories and their Managerial Applications", Service Science, Vol. 2, Nos. 1-2, pp. 126-135.
36. Olufunso F O (2010), "Graduate Entrepreneurial Intention in South Africa: Motivations an Obstacles", International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 5, No. 9, pp. 87-98.
37. Opatha H H D N P (2020), "Influence of Lecturers' Competence on Students' Satisfaction of Lecturing: Evidence for Mediating Role of Lecturing Behaviour", Universal Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 8, Vol. 4, pp. 1167-1179. http:// 10.13189/ujer.2020.080406
38. Paco A, Ferreira J, Raposo M, Rodrigues R and Dinis A (2011), "Behaviours and Entrepreneurial Intention: Empirical Findings about Secondary Students", Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 20-38.
39. Reynolds P D (1995), "Who Starts New Firms? Linear Additive versus Interaction-based Models", paper presented at the Babson-Kauffman Entrepreneurship Research Conference, London.
40. Rodrigues A P, Jorge F E, Pires C A and Antonio P (2019), "The Contribution of Emotional Intelligence and Spirituality in Understanding Creativity and Entrepreneurial Intention of Higher Education Students", Education + Training, Vol. 61, Nos. (7/8), pp. 870-894. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-01-2018-0026
41. Sekaran U (2000), Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach, 3rd Edition, Hermitage Publishing Services, New York.
42. Sekaran U and Bougie R (2013), Research Methods for Business, WILEY.
43. Solesvik M, Westhead P and Matlay H (2014), "Cultural Factors and Entrepreneurial Intention", Education + Training, Vol. 56(8/9), pp. 680- 696. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ET-07-2014-0075
44. Storen A L (2014), "Entrepreneurship in Higher Education: Impacts on Graduates' Entrepreneurial Intentions, Activity and Learning Outcome", Education + Training, Vol. 56, No. 8/9, pp. 795 813. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-06-2014-0070