Paradigma Berbasis Bukti dalam Kewirausahaan: Analisis Kualitatif atas Praktik Meta-Analisis dan Standar Pelaporan Akademik
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70142/studiaekonomika.v24i2.480Keywords:
Kewirausahaan Berbasis Bukti, Meta-Analisis, Standar Pelaporan, Tinjauan Sistematis, Transparansi PenelitianAbstract
This qualitative literature review explores the emergence of evidence-based paradigms in entrepreneurship research by analyzing the role of meta-analytic practices and academic reporting standards. Drawing on recent scholarly contributions, the study examines how systematic reviews and meta-analyses contribute to the accumulation of robust, generalizable knowledge in entrepreneurship. It also investigates the influence of frameworks such as PRISMA and APA's Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS) on methodological transparency and replicability. Findings reveal that while meta-analysis offers significant insights, its rigor depends on adherence to evolving reporting protocols and quality assessment tools. The review highlights gaps in current practices, particularly related to publication bias, heterogeneity, and ethical transparency. It calls for enhanced integration of evidence-based principles to strengthen the bridge between academic knowledge and entrepreneurial practice.
Downloads
References
Abbas-Aghababazadeh, F. X. W., Haibe-Kains, B., & Haibe-Kains, B. (2022). The impact of violating the independence assumption in meta-analysis on biomarker discovery. Frontiers in Genetics, 13, 1027345.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.1027345
Aguinis, H., Cascio, W. F., & Ramani, R. S. (2020). Science’s reproducibility and replicability crisis: International business is not immune. Journal of International Business Studies, 51(1), 32–43. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-019-00248-9
Aguinis, H., Dalton, D. R., Bosco, F. A., Pierce, C. A., & Dalton, C. M. (2011). Meta-analytic choices and judgment calls: Implications for theory building and testing, obtained effect sizes, and scholarly impact. Journal of Management, 37(1), 5–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310377113
Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Joo, H. (2013). Best-practice recommendations for defining, identifying, and handling outliers. Organizational Research Methods, 16(2), 270–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112470848
Appelbaum, M., Cooper, H., Kline, R. B., Mayo-Wilson, E., Nezu, A. M., & Rao, S. M. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report. American Psychologist, 73(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000191
Audretsch, D. B., Kuratko, D. F., & Link, A. N. (2015). Making sense of the elusive paradigm of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 45(4), 703–712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-015-9663-z
Baker, T., & Welter, F. (2017). Come on out of the ghetto, please! – Building the future of entrepreneurship research. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 23(2), 170–184. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-02-2016-0065
Beal, D. J., Corey, D. M., & Dunlap, W. P. (2002). On the bias of Huffcutt and Arthur’s (1995) procedure for identifying outliers in the meta-analysis of correlations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 583–589. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.583
Belur, J., Tompson, L., Thornton, A., & Simon, M. (2018). Interrater reliability in systematic review methodology: Exploring variation in coder decision-making. Sociological Methods & Research, 50(2), 837–865.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118799372
Benardi , Chaidir, M., Setyowati, A., 2021. Pengaruh Mata Pelajaran Kewirausahaan dan Lingkungan Pergaulan terhadap Motivasi Berwirausaha Siswa SMKS Al - Hamidiyah. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan Volume 3 Nomor 6 Tahun 2021 Hlm 4881 – 4888.
Chan, M. E., & Arvey, R. D. (2012). Meta-analysis and the development of knowledge. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(1), 79–92.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611429355
Cheung, S. F., Sun, R. W., & Chan, D. K. S. (2018). Correlation-based meta-analytic structural equation modeling: Effects of parameter covariance on point and interval estimates. Organizational Research Methods, 22(4), 892–916. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428118770736
Chrisman, J. J., Neubaum, D. O., Welter, F., & Wennberg, K. (2022). Knowledge accumulation in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46(3), 479–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587221093321
Combs, J. G., Crook, T. R., & Rauch, A. (2021). Meta-analyses in entrepreneurship: Accounting for heterogeneity and bias. In D. A. Shepherd & H. R. Aldrich (Eds.), Research handbook on entrepreneurship and organizational behavior (pp. 373–390). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789909050.00027
Combs, J. G., Crook, T. R., Ketchen, D. J., & Wright, M. (2021). Entrepreneurship at a crossroads: Meta-analysis as a foundation and path forward. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 15(3), 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1404
Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2019). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (3rd ed.). Russell Sage Foundation.
Crawford, G. C., et al. (2022). Advancing entrepreneurship theory through replication. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46(3), 779–799.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587211057422
Dalton, D. R., Aguinis, H., Dalton, C. M., Bosco, F. A., & Pierce, C. A. (2012). Revisiting the file drawer problem in meta‐analysis: An assessment of published and nonpublished correlation matrices. Personnel Psychology, 65(2), 221–249. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2012.01243.x
DeSimone, J. A., et al. (2020). Recommendations for reviewing meta-analyses in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 24(4), 694–717. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120967089
Ferguson, C. J., & Brannick, M. T. (2012). Publication bias in psychological science: Prevalence, methods for identifying and controlling, and implications for the use of meta-analyses. Psychological Methods, 17(1), 120–128.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024445
Frese, M., Bausch, A., Schmidt, P., Rauch, A., & Kabst, R. (2014). Evidence-based entrepreneurship: Cumulative science, action principles, and bridging the gap between science and practice. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 10(1), 1–62. https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000042
Frese, M., Rousseau, D. M., & Wiklund, J. (2014). The emergence of evidence–based entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(2), 209–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12094
Geyskens, I., et al. (2009). A review and evaluation of meta-analysis practices in management research. Journal of Management, 35(2), 393–419.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308328501
Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
Harari, M. B., Parola, H. R., Hartwell, C. J., & Riegelman, A. (2020). Literature searches in systematic reviews and meta-analyses: A review, evaluation, and recommendations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 118, 103377.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103377
Havránek, T., Horváth, R., Irsova, Z., & Rusnák, M. (2020). Meta-analysis and the reporting practices in economics. Journal of Economic Surveys, 34(5), 1147–1180. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12363
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Kepes, S., Wang, W., & Cortina, J. M. (2022). Heterogeneity in effect sizes: An assessment of the current state of the literature. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2022(1), 14476. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2022.200
Kvarven, A., Strømland, E., & Johannesson, M. (2020). Comparing meta-analyses and preregistered multiple-laboratory replication projects. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(4), 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0787-z
Martin, B. C., McNally, J. J., & Kay, M. J. (2013). Examining the formation of human capital in entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education outcomes. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(2), 211–224.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.03.002
Maula, M., Autio, E., & Murray, G. (2019). Organizational mechanisms of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(3), 410–434. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2017.0135
Mohamad Chaidir, Ngadi Permana, & Grace Yulianti. (2024). Pengungkapan Risiko Keamanan Siber: Dampaknya Terhadap Hubungan Pelanggan-Pemasok Dalam Rantai Pasok Perusahaan. Jurnal Visi Manajemen, 10(3), 283–296.
https://doi.org/10.56910/jvm.v10i3.586
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Muhammad Rizal, Farah Qalbia, & Eri Kusnanto. (2024). Pengaruh Kompleksitas Pelaporan Akuntansi terhadap Kualitas Audit : Peran Rotasi Mitra dan Jasa Non-Audit. Jurnal Visi Manajemen, 10(1), 54–64.
https://doi.org/10.56910/jvm.v10i1.557
Öztürk, M. T., Sert, T., & Gürlek, M. (2024). The relationship between green entrepreneurial orientation and sustainable performance: A meta-analytic review. Sustainability, 16(24), 11224. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162411224
Page, M. J., Sterne, J. A. C., Higgins, J. P. T., & Egger, M. (2021). Investigating and dealing with publication bias and other reporting biases in meta-analyses of health research: A review. Research Synthesis Methods, 12(2), 248–259. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1468
Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2006). Meta-analyzing the relationship between analyses and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 343–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2004.05.001
Rauch, A., & Gielnik, M. M. (2020). Evidence-based entrepreneurship: An extended approach. In Gielnik, M. M., Cardon, M. S., & Frese, M. (Eds.), The Psychology of Entrepreneurship (pp. 323–339). Routledge.
Rauch, A., Saeed, S., & Frese, M. (2024). Decoding evidence-based entrepreneurship: A systematic review of meta-analyses in the field. Journal of Small Business Management, Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2024.2411246
Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–787.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00308.x
Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments. Wiley.
Schalken, N., & Rietbergen, C. (2017). The reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in industrial and organizational psychology: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1395. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01395
Schmidt, F. L., & Oh, I.-S. (2013). Methods for second order meta-analysis and illustrative applications. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121(2), 204–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.03.002
Shepherd, D. A., & Suddaby, R. (2017). Theory building: A review and integration. Journal of Management, 43(1), 59–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316647102
Short, J. C. (2009). The art of writing a review article. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1312–1317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309337489
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Soares, F. A., & Perin, M. G. (2019). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: An updated meta-analysis. Revista de Administração USP, 54(4), 348–364. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-01-2019-0014
Steel, P., Beugelsdijk, S., & Aguinis, H. (2021). The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis: Recommendations for authors, reviewers, and readers of meta-analytic reviews. Journal of International Business Studies, 52(1), 23–44.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00385-z
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8, 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316671606
Yuan, Z., Morgeson, F. P., & LeBreton, J. M. (2020). Maybe not so independent after all: The possibility, prevalence, and consequences of violating the independence assumptions in psychometric meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 73(3), 491–516. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12372
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Studia Ekonomika
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
KABA Journal of Management and Entrepreneurship (KBJME) is licensed under the International Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
Articles in KABA Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship (KBJME) are Open Access articles published under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA License. This licence permits the use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium for non commercial purposes only, provided the work and orginal source are properly cited.
Any derivatives of the original must be distributed under the same license as the original.
