The Role of Entrepreneurship Education in DevelopingStudents

Entrepreneurial Intentions
Saeid Karimi,
saeid.karimi@wur.nl
Department of Social Sciences, Education and Competence Studies Group,
Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands
HarmJ.A. Biemans
harm.biemans@wur.nl
Department of Social Sciences, Education and Competence Studies Group,
Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands
Thomas Lans
thomas.lans@wur.nl
Department of Social Sciences, Education and Competence Studies Group,
Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands
Martin Mulder
martin.mulder@wur.nl
Department of Social Sciences, Education and Competence Studies Group,
Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands
Mohammad Chizari
mchizari@modares.ac.ir
Department of Agricultural Education and Extension, Agricultural College,
TarbiatModares University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
This study,based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB),assesses the impact of
entrepreneurship education programs (EEPs) on entrepreneurial intentionsof 320 students
following entrepreneurship courses at six Iranian universities. Data were collected by a
questionnaire before and after completing EEPs. Findings showed that the EEPshave a
significant impact on the students entrepreneurial intentions. Result also indicated that EEPs
significantly influence perceived behavioral control and subjective norms. However, no support
was found for the effects of EEPs on attitudes toward entrepreneurship.Findings suggest that the
TPB could be considered to provide a useful framework to analyze how EEP might influence
students entrepreneurial intentions.
Keywords: Entrepreneurship Education, Entrepreneurial Intention, Theory of Planned
Behaviour, Iran
Introduction
During the last decades, entrepreneurship has become an important economic and social topic as
well as a well-known research topic in the world (Fayolle and Gailly, 2007). Entrepreneurship is
important because it leads to increased economic efficiencies, brings innovation to market,
creates new jobs, and raises employment levels (Shane &Venkataraman, 2000). Most empirical
studies conducted indicate that entrepreneurship can be taught and that education can foster
entrepreneurship (Gatewood et al., 2002; Mitra&Matlay, 2004; Kuratko, 2005; Harris and
Gibson, 2008; Henry et al. 2005; Falkang and Alberti, 2000; Kirby, 2002; Kuratko, 2003), which
has led to a dramatic rise in the number and status of entrepreneurship programs at colleges and
universities (Finkle and Deeds, 2001; Kurakto, 2005; Matlay, 2005). The popularity of
entrepreneurship courses has increased dramatically among both graduate and undergraduate
students (Finkle and Deeds, 2001).The benefits of entrepreneurial education have been praised
by both researchers and educators; nevertheless, the impact these programs have on
entrepreneurial competencies and the intention to become an entrepreneur has remained largely
unexplored (Snchez, 2010).
In the recent decades paralleled with other countries regarding an increase attention toward
entrepreneurship, Iran has also witnessed and showed a significant interest in various
entrepreneurship fields, both in higher educational settings, policy making and business.
Accordingly, measures and mechanisms have been proposed to develop entrepreneurship in the
public and private sectors as well as universities. These measures as well the presence of a high
unemployment rate of university graduateshave led many private and public universities to
consider offeringentrepreneurship education to their students. Nonetheless, the lack of a
comprehensive policy framework for entrepreneurial education as well as empirical research
regarding effectiveness of current entrepreneurship education programs are a significant
impediment to improve effects of entrepreneurship education and achieve a rapid progress in the
field of entrepreneurship.In this context, it is of primary importance to understand whether
entrepreneurship education raises career intentions to be entrepreneur generally. The purpose of
this experimental study, therefore, is to contribute to filling this gap. Its aim is to explore the
impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intentions of students within the context
of Iranian higher education.

Entrepreneurial Intentions
In social psychology literature, intentions have proved to be a strong predictor of planned
individual behaviors, especially when that the behavior is rare, difficult to observe, or involves
unpredictable time lags (Krueger, Reilly and Carsrud, 2000); entrepreneurship is a typical
example of such planned and intentional behavior (Bird, 1988; Krueger and Brazeal, 1994).
There is a vast body of literature arguing that intentions play a very pertinent role in the decision
to start a new business (Linan and Chen, 2009). As a consequence, during the last recent years,
employment status choice models that focus on entrepreneurial intention have been the subject of
considerable interest in entrepreneurship research (Krueger and Carsrud, 1993; Kolvereid, 1996).
In these models career intention is seen as the immediate antecedent of behavior (such as starting
a business). Intentions in turn are determined by attitudes, and attitudes are affected by
exogenous influences such as traits, education, demographics and situational variables(Ajzen,
1991; Kolvereid, 1996; Krueger, 2003; Segal, Borgia &Schoenfeld, 2005; Souitaris et al., 2007).
Among intention models, one of the most widely researched is Theory of Planned Behavior
(TPB) (Ajzen, 1988, 1991).The efficacy and ability of TPB to predict entrepreneurial intentions
has been proven by number of studies in entrepreneurship (e.g. Kolvereid, 1996; Krueger et al.,
Autio et al., 2001; Engle et al., 2010 ).
In order to assess the effect of entrepreneurship education program (EEP), the present study
follows Fayolle et al, (2006) and Souitaris et al. (2007) to incorporate EEPas an exogenous
influence into the TPB. The central factor of the theory is the individual intention to perform a
given behavior. Consequently, the model stresses that three key attitudes or independent
antecedents predict intention: attitudes toward the behavior (the degree to which the individual
holds a positive or negative personal valuation about being an entrepreneur [Autio et al., 2001;
Kolvereid, 1996b]), subjective norms (the perceived social pressure from family, friends or
significant others [Ajzen, 1991] to start a new business or not), and perceived behavioral control
(the perceived easiness or difficulty of becoming an entrepreneur). The theory predicts that the
greater the favorable attitude and subjective norm with respect to the behavior, combined with a
strong perceived behavioral control, the greater the intention will be to perform the particular
behavior. This theory has been applied for the prediction of a wide range of human behaviors
(Fayolle et al. 2006) including entrepreneurial intentions.
Literature Review and Hypotheses
Some entrepreneurship researchers have empirically applied the TPB to students entrepreneurial
intentions and confirmed the theorys predictions regarding the impact of attitude, subjective
norm, and perceived behavioural control on their intentions ( e.g. Kolvereid, 1996a; Krueger et
al., 2000; Autio et al., 2001; Kennedy et al.; 2003; Angle et al., 2010). These studies support
Ajzens (1991) assertion that all three antecedents are important but they also show that their
relative importance is not the same in every situation and country and the magnitude of their
effects is not always the same. Thus, these findings suggest including all three of Ajzens
intention antecedents when examining entrepreneurial intentions.
Hypothesis 1: (a) Attitude towards entrepreneurship, (b) subjective norms, and (c) perceived
behavioral control with respect to entrepreneurship, are positively related to Iranian university
students entrepreneurial intention.

Entrepreneurship Education Effects on Entrepreneurial Intentions

Entrepreneurial education is frequently considered an effective strategy (Lin, 2004) towards
more innovation and its supposed benefits have been much praised by researchers and educators.
Nonetheless, the impact of such education on intention to set up a business and be an
entrepreneur is poorly understood at present and it has remained relatively untested (Donckels,
1991; KruegelJr and Brazeal, 1994; Gorman et al., 1997; Souitaris et al. 2007; Honig, 2004;
Peterman & Kennedy, 2003; Lepoutre, et al. 2010; Athayde, 2009; von Graevenitz et al. 2010).
Overall, however, results about entrepreneurship education initiatives are somewhat
inconclusive, and that more detailed research is needed to get a full understanding of the link
between entrepreneurship education and attitudesintentions (Lepoutre et al., 2010). Thus we
propose that:
Hypothesis 2: students that have followed an entrepreneurship education programwill have
higher (a) attitude towards entrepreneurial behavior, (b) subjective norm about entrepreneurship,
(c) perceived behavioral control and (d) entrepreneurial intentions after theprogram than before
the program.
Hypothesis 3: Students, who have increased their attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour,
their subjective norm about entrepreneurship, and their perceived behavioural control, will also
have increased their entrepreneurial intentions.
Research Method
A single group pretest-posttest design was adopted to measure the change of students
entrepreneurial intentionsover a period of approximately 4 months in current entrepreneurship
courses at Iranian universities during the academic year 2010-2011.
Our research used a quantitative method, including a questionnaire that was handed out at the
beginning of the first session (T1) and the end of the final session (T2) a four-month
entrepreneurship education course. Thequestionnaire was designed to measure business start-up
intentions, attitudes towards new business start-up, subjective norms, perceived behavioral
control, as well as participants background information and several control variables. . The posttest survey did not repeat the demographic and background questions.
Entrepreneurship as a course bears different codes depending on the institution and levels of
students offering the course. It is taught to undergraduate and graduate students in different
faculties/departments such as agricultural sciences, management, humanity sciences, and
engineering sciences and so on. Generally the contents of entrepreneurship courses, at whatever
level it is taught include some or all of the following topics:
- History of entrepreneurship, concepts and types of entrepreneurship
- Types and principles of business (business in home, rural business, business in information
technology, business in services sector)
- Market principles and management
- Success and failure story of several small business owners and entrepreneurs
- Assessing feasibility and selecting entrepreneurship ideas
- Development of business plan
- Procedures of company registration and establishment and getting familiar with types of
companies
- Business fundamentals in Iran economy and trade law
- Successful experiences of Iranian entrepreneurs

- Entrepreneurship skills: group work, resource management, financial management,

communications and
- Planning and organizing business
- Launching business, production, quality control and costs control
- Marketing, sales and customer relationship
The target population of the study was college students at 70 public universities in Iran which are
under the supervision of the Ministry of the Science, Research and Technology. To collect data,
we first drew a stratified random sample of 15 universities from general population of 70 public
universities. Strata were based on the ranking by the Islamic World Science Citation Center
(ISC). The ranking analyzes research performance, international cooperation and scientific
impact of a university. Based on the ranking, the universities were divided into three groups:
high-ranking (23 universities), intermediate-ranking (23 universities) , and low-ranking (24
universities). We selected five universities from each group. However, nine universities did not
offer any courses regarding entrepreneurship at the study time. Thus, the final sample included
six universities, two universities from each group.
Undergraduate students who enrolled in entrepreneurship courses at six Iranian universities
served as the sample for the study (n=320). The reason for including a high number of different
universities was the objective of covering a wide range of different class characteristics and of
different ranking of Iranian universities. As not all the students in the university were allowed to
take entrepreneurship courses, respondents for ourquestionnaire were selected on a purposive
basis.
275 students participated in the first survey (response rate 86 per cent) and 240students in the
second survey (response rate 75 per cent). For 209 students we were able to match the
questionnaires (at t1 and at t2). They represent 65percent of total enrollment in the
entrepreneurship courses at the selected universities. A t-test indicated non-significant
differences between respondents and incomplete non-respondents (students who filled in the
t1-questionnaire but failed to respond at t2).
The sample was 209university students, 87men (%41.5) and 122 women (%58.5), with ages
ranging between 19 and 31, and a mean 22.06 years. There was no control groups, just
participating students filled out both questionnaires.
In general terms, the distribution ofthe sample according to college major includes: Agricultural
Sciences (49.8%), Engineering Sciences (21.5%), and BusinessScience (21.5%), other majors
(Humanistic and Basic Sciences)(7.2%),
At the general level, we measured the central TPB constructs with a multi-item measure based on
the work of previous authors. The responses were given on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (I
totally disagree) to 7 (I totally agree). These items, the sources from where the items were
adapted and their reliabilities are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1:Details of the constructs

Construct

Literature Source

No of
Item

Cronbachs
alpha

Entrepreneurial Intentions

Six items were taken from Lin and Chen (2009):

T1
0.87

T2
0.88

0.85

0.84

0.82

0.78

0.88

0.89

-Im ready to make anything to be an entrepreneur.

-My professional goal is becoming an entrepreneur.
-I will make every effort to start and run my own business.
-Im determined to create a firm in the future
-I have very seriously thought in starting a business.
- Ive got the firm intention to start a firm someday.

One item was taken from Kolvereid (1996) and

Armitage and Connor (2001):
-Im going to start my own business within one years of
graduation.

Attitude toward
Entrepreneurship

Adapted from Linan and Chen (2009):

-A career as an entrepreneur is totally unattractive to me.
-If I had the opportunity and resources, I would love to start a
business.
- Amongst various options, I would rather be anything but an
Entrepreneur.
-Being an entrepreneur would give me great satisfaction
-Being an entrepreneur implies more advantages than
disadvantages to me.

Subjective Norm (belief and

motivation to comply)

Adapted from Kolvereid (1996b), which has been

used inKolvereid and Isakson (2006); Krueger et al.
(2000) and Souitaris et al. (2007):
- Closest family (belief*recoded motivation)
- Closest friends (belief*recoded motivation)
-Important others (belief*recoded motivation)

Perceived behavioural
control

Adopted from Linan and Chen (2009) and Kolvereid

(1996):
-Starting a firm and keeping it viable would be easy for me
- I believe I would be completely unable to start a business
- I am able to control the creation process of a new business
- If I tried to start a business, I would have a high chance of being.
- I know all about the practical details needed to start a business.
- The number of events outside my control which could prevent
me from starting a new business are very few.
- For me, developing a business idea would be easy.

Analysis and results

For the purpose of testing the relationships between entrepreneurial intentions and its antecedents
(Hypothesis1), we employeda regression analysis. The results of that linear regression are
presented in Table 2. The results revealed that at both pre-test and post-test time, students
entrepreneurial intention was significantly influenced by attitudes toward entrepreneurship,
subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control. Therefore, Hypothesis1 (a,b,c) was
accepted.The study also found that perceived behavioural control had the greatest influence on
entrepreneurial intentions.This confirms the validity of the TPB (at t1: R2 = 0.51, p< 0.01; at t2:
R2=0.48, p<0.01) in this study.

Table 2: Regression models of attitudes upon intentions at time 1 and time 2

Predictor variables

Perceived behavioral
control
Attitudes towards
entrepreneurship
Subjective norm
Adjusted R2
*p<0.05, **p<0.001

Intention (model at
time 1) Standardised
coefficients
.459**

Intention (model at
time 2) Standardised
coefficients
.488**

.332**

.186**

.133*
0.51

.200**
0.48

To assess the impacts of the entrepreneurship courses on the students entrepreneurial attitudes
and intentions, we conducted paired t-tests. Table 3 summarizes the results of these t-tests. The
results showed that there are positive and significant differences in pre- and post-values of all
variables except attitude toward entrepreneurship, confirmingHypotheses 2b, 2c and 2d;
however, Hypotheses 2a was not supported.
Table 3: Analysis of Paired Samples T-tests for the programs effects (N = 209)
Variables

Mean

SD

SE

Sig.

Diff.
Post-pre Entrepreneurial Intention

,26589

1,67974

,11619

2,288

,023

Post-pre perceived behavioural control

,44224

1,56066

,10795

4,097

,000

Post-pre Attitude toward entrepreneurship

,06890

1,25539

,08684

,793

,428

3,68900

10,14439

,70170

5,257

,000

Post-pre Subjective Norm

In order to test Hypothesis 3, we used a correlation analysis, as summarized in Table 4. As

expected, a change in attitudes toward entrepreneurship, subjective norms, and perceived
behavioral control was significantly related to increased entrepreneurial intentions. Therefore,
Hypothesis 3 was accepted.
Table 4: Means, standard deviations and Bivariate Pearson correlation for all variables
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Variable
Entrepreneurial intention (t1)
Perceived behavioural control (t1)
Attitudes towards entrepreneurship
(t1)
Subjective norm (t1)
Entrepreneurial intention (t2)
Perceived behavioural control (t2)
Attitudes towards entrepreneurship
(t2)
Subjective norm (t2)
Entrepreneurial intention (t2-t1)
Perceived behavioural control (t2t1)
Attitudes towards entrepreneurship
(t2-t1)
Subjective norm (t2-t1)

*p<0.05, **p<0.001

Mean

SD

4.67

1.4

10

11

4.04

1.2

.62**

4.96

.10

.51**

.27**

4.00

24.4

.42**

.56**

.27**

4.94

1.3

.24**

.06

.11*

.07

4.49

1.2

.23**

.17*

.06

.13

.65**

5.03

.95

.14*

.10

.19**

.17*

.37**

.30**

7.10

23.1

.26**

.18**

.13

.18**

.52**

.64**

.24**

.27

1.68

-.65**

-.47**

-.34**

-.30**

.58**

.31**

.17*

.19**

.44

1.56

-.30**

-.64**

-.16*

-.33**

.46**

.65**

.16*

.36**

.61**

069

1.25

-.31**

-.15*

-.68**

-.09

.19**

.17*

.59**

.07

.41**

.25**

3.69

10.1

-.11

-.28**

-.11

-.61**

.36**

.41**

.06

.66**

.38**

.54**

153*

12

Discussion and Conclusion

These results confirm the findings of previous studies in terms of the significant relationship
between entrepreneurial intention and its antecedents and thereby lend further support to the
application of the TPB to predicting and understanding entrepreneurial behavior. The findings
also showed that the entrepreneurship education programs have a significant on the students
entrepreneurial intentions. This finding is consistent with the findings of prior studies (e.g.
Peterman & Kennedy, 2003; Souitaris et al., 2007; Lepoutre et al., 2010).Furthermore, we also
found confirmation for the impacts of EEP on the perceived behavioral control (Peterman &
Kennedy, 2003; Lepoutre et al., 2010) and the subjective norms (Souitaris et al., 2007). Contrary
to our expectations, no support was found for the effects of the entrepreneurship education
programs on attitudes toward entrepreneurship. This finding is in line with the study of Souitaris
et al. (2007); however, it conflicts with prior research (e.g. Lepoutre et al., 2010; Peterman and
Kennedy, 2003;Athayde, 2009). A possible explanation is that the students had a positive
attitudes towards entrepreneurship at the beginning of the program (Mean=4.96) and therefore
there was less scope for changing their attitudes.
Our findings strongly suggest that participation in EEP can positively influence students
entrepreneurial intentions and perceived behavioural control conforming that universities can
shape and foster entrepreneurial intentions and abilities through EEP. The study provides a
contribution to the current entrepreneurship literature by using the TPB in the field
ofentrepreneurship education. This theory is considered to provide a useful framework to analyze
how EEP, as an exogenous influence, might influence studentsentrepreneurial intentions.
References
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior. Dorsey Press, Chicago, IL.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50: 179-211.
Athayde, R. 2009. Measuring Enterprise Potential in Young People. Entrepreneurship Theory
and Practice, 33(2): 481-500.
Autio, E., Keeley, R.H., Klofsten, M., Parker, G. and Hay, M. (2001).Entrepreneurial intent
among students in Scandinavia and in the USA.Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies,
2 (2): 145-60.
Bird, B. (1988).Implementing Entrepreneurial Ideas: The Case for Intention.Academy of
Management Review, 13(3), 442-453
Donckels, R. (1991). Education and entrepreneurship experiences from secondary and university
education in Belgium.Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 9(1), 3542.
Engle, R.L.; Dimitriadi, N.; Gavidia, J.V.; Schlaegel, C.; Delanoe, S.; Alvarado, I.; He, X.;
Buame, S.; Wolff, B. (2010). Entrepreneurial intent: A twelve-country evaluation of Ajzen's
model of planned behaviour. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research,
16(1), 36-58.

Falkang, J. &Alberti, F. (2000).The assessment of entrepreneurship education.Industry and

Higher Education, 14 (2), 101-108.
Fayolle, A., B. Gailly, et al. (2007).Towards A New Methodology to Assess Entrepreneurship
Teaching Programmes, in Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education. A. Fayolle.
Cheltenam, Edward Elgar.
Fayolle, A., Gailly, B. and Lassas-Clerc, N. (2006). Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship
education programmes: a new methodology. Journal of European Industrial Training, 30 (9):
701-20.
Finkle T.A., and Deeds, D. (2001).Trends in the market for entrepreneurship faculty, 19891998.Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 613-30.
Gatewood, E.K. et al. (2002). The effects of perceived entrepreneurial ability on task effort,
performance, and expectancy.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(2), 187206.
Gorman, G., Hanlon, D., & King, W. 1997. Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship
education, enterprise education and education for small business management: A ten year
literature review. International Small Business Journal, 15: 5677.
Harris, M.L., Gibson, S.G. (2008). Examining the entrepreneurial attitudes of US business
students.Education + Training, 50(7), 568-81.
Henry, C., Hill, F. and Leitch, C. (2005). Entrepreneurship education and training: Can
entrepreneur-ship be taught? Part I. Education and Training, 47, 98-111.
Honig, B. (2004). Entrepreneurship education: Toward a model of contingency-based business
planning. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3,258 273.
Kennedy, J., Drennan, J., Renfrow, P. and Watson, B. (2003).Situational factors and
entrepreneurial intentions. Paper presented at the 16th Annual Conference of Small Enterprise
Association of Australia New Zealand 28th September-1st October.
Kirby, D. (2002). Entrepreneurship education: can business schools meets the challenge. paper
presented at the RENT Conference, Barcelona, November.
Kolvereid, L. (1996a). Organizational employment versus self-employment: reasons for career
choice intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, (20)3: 23-31.
Kolvereid, L. (1996b). Predictions of employment status choice intentions.Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, 21 (1): 47-57.
Krueger,
N.
&Brazeal,
D.
(1994).Entrepreneurial
potential
&
potential
entrepreneurs.Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 18(3): 91-104.

Krueger, N. (1993). The impact of prior entrepreneurial exposure on perceptions of new venture
feasibility and desirability.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18 (1,): 5-21.
Krueger, N.F. (2003). The cognitive psychology of entrepreneurship.inAcs, Z. and Audretsch,
D.B. (Eds), Handbook of Entrepreneurial Research, Kluwer Law International, London, pp.
105-40
Krueger, N.F. Jr, Reilly, M.D. and Carsrud, A.L. (2000).Competing models of entrepreneurial
intentions.Journal of Business Venturing, (15): 411-32.
Kuratko, D. F. 2005. The emergence of entrepreneurship education: Development, trends, and
challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5): 577-598
Lepoutre, J. , Van den Berghe, W. , Tilleuil, O., Crijns, H. (2010). A new approach to testing the
effects of entrepreneurship education among secondary school pupils.Vlerick Leuven Gent
Working Paper Series 2010/01. Leuven, Belgium: Autonomous Management School.
Lin, F. and Chen, Y. (2009).Development and Cross-Cultural Application of a Specific
Instrument to Measure Entrepreneurial Intentions.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3),
593Matlay, H. (2005). Entrepreneurship education in UK business schools: conceptual, contextual
and policy considerations. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 12(4),627-43.
Mitra, J., Matlay, H. (2004). Entrepreneurial and vocational education and training: lessons from
Eastern and Central Europe. Industry & Higher Education,18 (1), 53-69.
Peterman, N. E. & Kennedy, J. 2003.Enterprise education: Influencing students' perceptions of
entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship-Theory and Practice, 28(2): 129-144.
Snchez, J.C. (2010). University training for entrepreneurial competencies: Its impact on
intention of venture creation. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7(2),
239-254
Segal, G., Borgia, D., &Schoenfeld, J. (2005).The motivation to become
entrepreneur.International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 11(1): 42-57.

an

Shane, S., &Venkataraman, S. (2000).The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of

research.Academy of Management Review, 25, 217-226.
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
vonGraevenitz, G., Harhoff, D., Weber, R. (2010). The effects of entrepreneurship
education.Journal of Economic Behaviour& Organization 76(1): 90-112.