INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3272 www.rsisinternational.org
Bridging the Intention–Action Gap through Entrepreneurial
Optimism: A Conceptual Exploration
Nasiru Sani Ibrahim1*, Umar Haiyat Abdul Kohar2
1,2Faculty of Management, University Technology Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
*Corresponding Author
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000267
Received: 12 October 2025; Accepted: 19 October 2025; Published: 10 November 2025
ABSTRACT
The importance of entrepreneurial intention has been widely recognised as veritable and reliable predictor of
entrepreneurial action, However, many individuals who intend to start businesses fail to act accordingly. This
problem, known as the intention–action gap, has become a major concern in entrepreneurship studies. Drawing
on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and positive psychology, this conceptual paper explores
entrepreneurial optimism as a moderating variable that can bridge this intention-action gap. Entrepreneurial
optimism can be defined as a positive cognitive bias toward expecting favorable outcomes thereby enhancing
persistence, confidence, and resilience under uncertainty. This study integrates TPB with psychological capital
theory to propose a model in which optimism strengthens the relationship between entrepreneurial intention and
entrepreneurial action. The By synthesized insights from recent and established studies, this study extends TPB’s
explanatory power and offers a more psychologically grounded understanding of entrepreneurial action. The
paper also outlines implications for entrepreneurship education and policy in developing economies like Nigeria,
particularly regarding programs that inculcate and cultivate optimism among young entrepreneurs. The paper
concludes with calls for empirical validation to further examine optimism’s moderating role and other
psychological factors in the intention–action relationship.
Keywords: Entrepreneurial optimism, Theory of Planned Behavior, Intention–Action Gap, Entrepreneurial
Action, Psychological Capital
INTRODUCTION
Entrepreneurship plays a major role in employment generation and economic transformation, specifically in
developing countries (Akinwale & Adepoju, 2021). However, despite strong entrepreneurial intentions among
young individuals, only a small number translate these intentions into actual action of starting a business. This
problem commonly known as intention–action gap signifies a serious challenge to promoting and understanding
of entrepreneurial action (Kautonen, van Gelderen & Fink, 2015; Neneh, 2022).
The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) provides one of the most widely used frameworks for
predicting entrepreneurial intentions. It posits that attitudes toward behavior, subjective norms, and perceived
behavioral control (PBC) influence the intention to act, which in turn predicts behavior. However, empirical
findings show that intentions do not always lead to entrepreneurial action (Shirokova, Osiyevskyy & Bogatyreva,
2018). Therefore, scholars have called for integrating psychological constructs to explain why some individuals
act while others hesitate (Campos, Frese & Gielnik, 2022; Schlaegel & Koenig, 2014).
Entrepreneurial optimism, derived from positive psychology (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) and
conceptualized as part of psychological capital (Luthans, Youssef-Morgan & Avolio, 2019), offers a promising
extension. Entrepreneurial optimism shapes how entrepreneurs interpret risk, setbacks and opportunities thereby
enhancing perseverance and confidence (Hmieleski & Lerner, 2020; Olawale & Garwe, 2023). This paper argues
that optimism strengthens the link between intention and action by empowering individuals to overcome
uncertainty and obstacles typical of new venture creation.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3273 www.rsisinternational.org
Although this model is broadly applicable, the study contributes conceptually by integrating entrepreneurial
optimism into the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) within the specific context of cooperative studies students
in Northern Nigeria. Unlike prior intention–behavior studies that focused mainly on cognitive determinants. This
paper introduces an affective motivational dimension that explains why intentions fail to translate into concrete
entrepreneurial action. A deeper understanding of psychological mechanisms such as optimism can enhance this
transition, which is essential for fostering entrepreneurship economic growth in developing countries like
Nigeria.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Theory of Planned Behavior and Entrepreneurship
The Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen (1991), is one of the most widely used framework in entrepreneurship
research, offering a good explanation of how individual attitudes, subjective norm and perceived behavioral
control shape entrepreneurial intentions and subsequent action/behavior. TPB explains that, behavior is
determined primarily by an individual’s intention to perform that behavior, which subsequently influenced by
attitude toward the behavior, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (PBC). TPB extends the initial
Theory of Reasoned Action, recognizing that individuals often encounter limitations in volitional control and
that behavioral performance depends not only on motivation but also on perceived ability and opportunity.
Within entrepreneurship, TPB provides a solid foundation for examining how personal beliefs and perceived
capabilities translate into the desire to engage in venture creation or entrepreneurial action (Ajzen, 2020; Krueger,
Reilly, & Carsrud, 2000).
TPB has been widely validated for many years as a reliable model for predicting entrepreneurial intention across
different educational backgrounds, contexts and cultures (Nowiński et al., 2019; Liñán & Fayolle, 2015).
However, study finding indicates that while the theory effectively explains intention formation, it falls short in
predicting actual entrepreneurial behavior, giving rise to what scholars describe as the intention–action gap
(Kautonen, van Gelderen, & Fink, 2015). Many individuals show strong entrepreneurial intentions but fail to
take the actual steps toward establishing a business, implying that intention alone does not confirm action. These
inconsistencies have prompted scholars to call for theoretical extensions that incorporate psychological,
situational, and contextual variables thereby influencing the translation of intention into action or behavior
(Fayolle & Liñán, 2014; Gorgievski & Stephan, 2016).
Several studies reveals that psychological resources such as optimism, resilience, and self-efficacy play an
important role in stimulating the relationship between intention and behavior (Campos, Frese, & Gielnik, 2022;
Newman, Obschonka, Schwarz, Cohen, & Nielsen, 2019). For instance, Neneh (2022) found that entrepreneurial
self-efficacy and situational support significantly predict whether students who intend to start a business actually
act upon it. Similarly, Shirokova, Osiyevskyy, and Bogatyreva (2018) emphasized that individual traits and
environmental support systems together influence the conversion of entrepreneurial intention into action. These
insights indicated that motivational and cognitive factors are important in addressing inertia, uncertainty, and
fear linked to entrepreneurial activity (Sheeran & Webb, 2016).
To address this gap, researchers have advocated integrating TPB with positive psychology constructs such as
psychological capital (PsyCap), a higher-order construct including hope, self-efficacy, resilience, and optimism
(Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007; Newman et al., 2014). Among these, optimism has received increasing
attention as a potential moderating factor in entrepreneurial action because it reflects a person’s general
expectation that future outcomes will be positive. Optimistic entrepreneurs are more likely to persist in the face
of uncertainty, reinterpret challenges as temporary, and maintain confidence that their efforts will yield success
(Raeis, Ghorbani, & Taghipour, 2024; Luthans, Youssef-Morgan, & Avolio, 2019; Hmieleski & Lerner, 2020).
These features makes optimism an essential psychological instrument that can stimulate persistence and
proactive behavior, thus narrowing the intention–behavior gap.
Nevertheless, this paper conceptualizes entrepreneurial optimism as a moderator within the TPB framework,
influencing the strength and consistency of the relationship between entrepreneurial intention and
entrepreneurial action. This extension aligns with the emerging consensus in entrepreneurship research that
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3274 www.rsisinternational.org
integrating cognitive-behavioral models with psychological resource theories offers a richer understanding of
entrepreneurial action (Yasir & Majid, 2023; Hmieleski & Lerner, 2020; Otache, 2024). Incorporating optimism
not only enhances the explanatory power of TPB but also provides actionable implications for entrepreneurship
educators and policymakers aiming to foster resilient and proactive entrepreneurs, particularly among
cooperative studies students in Northern Nigeria.
Critique of Prior Theoretical Models
While the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991; 2020) and Psychological Capital Theory (Luthans et al.,
2007) have been instrumental in explaining entrepreneurial intention and action, prior studies have tended to
apply these frameworks descriptively, often without interrogating their conceptual boundaries or contextual
assumptions. For example, most applications of TPB assume a rational decision-making process, however,
entrepreneurial behavior is also driven by affective and cognitive biases such as optimism, overconfidence, and
perceived feasibility that TPB alone may not capture (Gorgievski & Stephan, 2016; Sheeran & Webb, 2016).
Additionally, research on Psychological Capital (PsyCap) frequently treats optimism as a stable, positive trait
rather than a dynamic moderator that can alter behavioral relationships (Newman et al., 2019). This has limited
the theoretical development of optimism as an interactive psychological mechanism capable of influencing the
strength of intention–action links. Moreover, earlier studies rarely questioned whether optimism functions
uniformly across cultures, despite evidence that collectivist or uncertainty-averse environments, such as those in
developing economies may alter how optimism affects entrepreneurial action (Yasir & Majid, 2023).
This study contributes by moving beyond descriptive validation of TPB and PsyCap, offering a theoretically
grounded extension that positions entrepreneurial optimism as a moderating construct, rather than merely a
positive disposition.
Entrepreneurial Optimism and the Intention–Action Gap
Optimism is a central construct in positive psychology, representing a generalized expectation that good things
will happen in the future (Carver & Scheier, 2014). Within the entrepreneurial context, optimism refers to a
positive cognitive evaluation of potential business outcomes and challenges, influencing how individuals
perceive risks and persist toward their goals (Hmieleski & Lerner, 2020). Entrepreneurs who exhibit high
optimism tend to interpret obstacles as temporary and controllable rather than permanent or overwhelming. This
cognitive orientation fosters persistence and opportunity recognition, especially in uncertain environments where
external support and predictability are limited (Campos, Frese, & Gielnik, 2022; Luthans, Youssef-Morgan, &
Avolio, 2019).
The role of optimism in entrepreneurship has attracted the attention of scholars because of its importance in
explaining why individuals with similar intentions display different behavioral outcomes. Optimism helps in
motivational persistence, self-regulatory focus, and emotional resilience, which are essential for bridging the
intention–action gap (Neneh, 2022; Gorgievski & Stephan, 2016). According to Psychological Capital (PsyCap)
theory, optimism is one of four key psychological resources. These key psychological resources includes hope,
self-efficacy, and resilience which assist individuals to overcome challenges and pursue goals with sustained
effort (Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007). Empirical studies confirm that optimism significantly predicts
entrepreneurial success, innovation, and venture survival (Yasir & Majid, 2023; Hmieleski & Lerner, 2020).
Similarly, various studies have identified optimism as a moderating or mediating variable that shapes how
intention translates into entrepreneurial action. For instance, Raeis, Ghorbani, and Taghipour (2024) found that
optimism mediated the relationship between psychological capital and entrepreneurial behavior, suggesting that
optimism enhances proactive tendencies and risk-taking. Similarly, Newman et al. (2019) reported that
entrepreneurs high in optimism were more likely to act upon their intentions because they perceived fewer
psychological and environmental barriers. This aligns with the self-regulatory perspective that optimistic
individuals exhibit stronger goal commitment and persistence in the face of adversity (Carver, Scheier, &
Segerstrom, 2010).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3275 www.rsisinternational.org
Optimism also interacts with cognitive processes associated with the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). While
TPB emphasizes attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control as determinants of intention and
behavior, optimism strengthens these relationships by enhancing confidence in expected outcomes. Optimistic
individuals tend to hold more favorable attitudes toward entrepreneurship, perceive greater control over business
outcomes, and reduce social discouragement (Ajzen, 2020; van Gelderen, Kautonen, & Fink, 2018). Optimism
can therefore be seen as psychological amplifier that stimulates the stability and enactment of entrepreneurial
intentions.
However, the role of optimism is not universally positive. Excessive optimism may lead to overconfidence bias
and unrealistic expectations, potentially resulting in poor judgment and resource misallocation (Hmieleski &
Baron, 2009; Trevelyan, 2016). The challenge, therefore, lies in distinguishing between functional optimism—
which promotes adaptive motivation—and dysfunctional optimism, which can undermine rational decision-
making. Recent literature emphasizes maintaining a balance between optimism and critical realism to ensure
sound entrepreneurial decisions (Yasir & Majid, 2023). Therefore, optimism should moderate not excessive.
In a nutshell, entrepreneurial optimism serves as a vital psychological mechanism that may moderate the link
between intention and behavior. It provides the emotional energy and cognitive confidence required to transform
entrepreneurial plans into action. Its particularly relevant in developing contexts characterized by uncertainty
and limited institutional support. Thus, extending the Theory of Planned Behavior to include entrepreneurial
optimism as a moderating construct offers a theoretically grounded pathway to explain why some individuals
act on their intentions while others do not. This integration bridges motivational and psychological perspectives,
enriching the predictive validity of TPB within entrepreneurship studies.
Although optimism generally enhances persistence, excessive optimism can lead to cognitive bias, unrealistic
planning, and misallocation of resources (Hmieleski & Baron, 2009; Trevelyan, 2016). Therefore, optimism
should be understood as a bounded psychological resource whose adaptive function depends on the balance
between confidence and critical realism. In high-uncertainty settings such as Northern Nigeria, optimism may
also interact with cultural norms emphasizing community support and shared responsibility, which can shape
how entrepreneurs interpret risk and success.
Recognizing these cultural and contextual nuances enhances the applicability of the proposed model and avoids
the assumption that optimism operates uniformly across societies. Thus, this conceptual paper not only
underscores the enabling potential of optimism but also highlights its situational limits.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND PROPOSITIONS
Theoretical Integration
The proposed framework integrates the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) and Psychological
Capital (PsyCap) theory (Luthans et al., 2007) within the broader lens of positive psychology (Seligman &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). TPB provides a well-established foundation for explaining how attitude toward
entrepreneurship, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (PBC) collectively determine
entrepreneurial intention, which in turn predicts entrepreneurial action. However, research consistently shows
that intention alone does not always translate into behavior, producing what scholars term the intention–action
gap (Kautonen et al., 2015; Shirokova et al., 2018).
This study argues that the gap arises partly from volitional and emotional limitations within the TPB model,
which focuses on rational cognition but underrepresents motivational and affective forces that sustain goal
pursuit under uncertainty. Thus, the integration of PsyCap theory enriches TPB by introducing emotional self-
regulation and motivational persistence as psychological mechanisms influencing behavior.
Within PsyCap, optimism represents a future-oriented expectation of favorable outcomes, enabling individuals
to sustain motivation and confidence even when facing uncertainty (Luthans et al., 2019). Optimism strengthens
perceived behavioral control by reinforcing the belief that desired outcomes are attainable despite barriers, and
it enhances self-regulation by helping individuals reinterpret setbacks as temporary and manageable. Therefore,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3276 www.rsisinternational.org
optimism can function as a moderating variable between intention and action, increasing the likelihood that
individuals with strong entrepreneurial intentions actually engage in entrepreneurial activities.
Furthermore, optimism complements the cognitive assumptions of TPB with emotional readiness, bridging the
motivational gap that often prevents intentions from materializing. The framework thus conceptualizes
entrepreneurial optimism as a psychological amplifier that energizes the pathway from entrepreneurial intention
to entrepreneurial action.
Conceptual Model
Figure 1.0 depicts the integrated framework. The left section represents the TPB core components—attitude
toward entrepreneurship, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control, all influencing entrepreneurial
intention. Entrepreneurial optimism moderates the path between entrepreneurial intention and entrepreneurial
action, implying that individuals with higher optimism are more likely to act upon their entrepreneurial intentions
than those with lower optimism.
Figure 1.0: Conceptual framework integrating entrepreneurial optimism as a moderating construct within the
Theory of Planned Behavior, illustrating how optimism enhances the translation of entrepreneurial intention into
entrepreneurial action.
Theoretical Logic and Justification
Logically, this integration rests on three foundations:
1. Cognitive–Affective Complementarity: While TPB explains how rational cognition forms intention, PsyCap
contributes affective elements such as optimism that influence persistence and goal enactment (Newman et al.,
2019).
2. Volitional Control and Self-Regulation: Intention requires volitional effort to become action. Optimism
enhances volition by reinforcing goal commitment and reducing avoidance behavior in uncertain contexts
(Carver & Scheier, 2014; Raeis et al., 2024).
3. Contextual Adaptability: In developing economies like Northern Nigeria, entrepreneurs face structural
uncertainty. Optimism provides psychological resilience, helping individuals act despite limited external support
or institutional stability.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3277 www.rsisinternational.org
The present model contributes conceptually by deepening the explanatory logic of the Theory of Planned
Behavior (TPB) through the integration of entrepreneurial optimism as a moderating variable. While prior TPB-
based studies (e.g., Ajzen, 1991; Kautonen et al., 2015) have effectively predicted entrepreneurial intention, their
ability to explain why intentions often fail to translate into action remains limited. This conceptual model
advances TPB by introducing a motivational–affective mechanism—entrepreneurial optimism—that operates at
the volitional stage between intention and behavior. Unlike traditional cognitive constructs, optimism sustains
persistence, reinforces perceived behavioral control, and buffers against discouragement when external or
situational barriers arise (Carver & Scheier, 2014; Luthans et al., 2019).
Theoretically, this framework bridges cognitive intention models with positive psychology, creating a dual-
process understanding in which emotional energy and expectancy beliefs complement rational decision-making.
This integration adds novelty by emphasizing the psychological endurance required to execute entrepreneurial
goals, particularly in resource-constrained and uncertain environments like Northern Nigeria. Furthermore, by
positioning optimism as a bounded construct—adaptive when balanced with critical realism (Hmieleski & Baron,
2009; Trevelyan, 2016)—the model also acknowledges potential cultural and contextual limitations. Thus, the
model contributes not merely by adding a variable, but by reframing the intention–action process as both
cognitive and motivational, expanding the theoretical depth of TPB in entrepreneurship research.
Propositions
P1: Entrepreneurial intention positively influences entrepreneurial action.
P2: Entrepreneurial optimism moderates the relationship between entrepreneurial intention and entrepreneurial
action, strengthening it under high optimism.
P3: Integrating entrepreneurial optimism into TPB increases its explanatory power for predicting entrepreneurial
action.
METHODOLOGY
This paper adopts a conceptual design, relying solely on secondary sources. Relevant literature published
between 2015 and 2025 was reviewed from reputable databases such as Google Scholar, Scopus and Emerald
Insight. The review focused on studies related to the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991; 2020),
entrepreneurial optimism, and the intention–behavior gap. The conceptual framework was developed through
the integration of TPB and Psychological Capital Theory (Luthans et al., 2007; 2019), following guidelines for
conceptual development by Whetten (1989) and Jaakkola (2020). The outcome is a theoretical model proposing
entrepreneurial optimism as a moderator between entrepreneurial intention and action.
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Entrepreneurial optimism provides a psychological bridge between entrepreneurial intention and entrepreneurial
action. Optimists tend to interpret obstacles as manageable, maintain motivation in uncertainty, and recover
quickly from the possible setbacks (Carver & Scheier, 2014; Luthans et al., 2019).
Theoretically, this paper extends TPB by introducing a motivational component from positive psychology.
Practically, encouraging optimism in entrepreneurship education can strengthen students’ capacity to execute
business ideas (Otache, 2024). Educators can incorporate reflection, mentoring, and experiential learning to
enhance positive expectancy and resilience.
Additionally, Policy interventions should support programs that develop psychological capital like optimism
among youth entrepreneurs. Even though this approach is not limited to only developing economies, it is
particularly relevant in developing economies like Nigeria where structural barriers discourage action despite
high entrepreneurial intentions. Especially, for Cooperative Studies Students in Northern Nigeria,
entrepreneurship education programs can integrate psychological capital development, particularly optimism
training, to help students sustain motivation and confidence in uncertain environments. Inculcating such
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3278 www.rsisinternational.org
initiatives within the tertiary institutions curricula may enhance graduates’ ability to translate intention into real
entrepreneurial activities.
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH
This conceptual paper proposes that entrepreneurial optimism moderates the relationship between
entrepreneurial intention and entrepreneurial action, thereby bridging the intention–action gap. The study
contributes to theory by extending TPB through the inclusion of optimism, a core element of psychological
capital.
Future research should empirically test the proposed model using data from various regions and entrepreneurship
education contexts. Studies can include other psychological factors such as hope, resilience, and self-efficacy to
compare their moderating effects on intention and action. Researchers may also explore gender and cultural
differences in optimism’s influence on entrepreneurship behavior.
By fostering optimism and resilience, entrepreneurship education can shift from teaching what to do toward
empowering how to persist, turning entrepreneurial intention into concrete entrepreneurial action.
REFERENCES
1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
2. Ajzen, I. (2020). The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions. Human Behavior and
Emerging Technologies, 2(4), 314–324.
3. Akinwale, Y., & Adepoju, A. (2021). Youth entrepreneurship and innovation for sustainable
development in Africa. Journal of African Business, 22(3), 319–337.
4. Campos, F., Frese, M., & Gielnik, M. M. (2022). The psychology of entrepreneurship: The next
decade. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 71(4), 1241–1272.
5. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2014). Dispositional optimism. In M. W. Gallagher & S. J. Lopez
(Eds.), Positive Psychological Assessment (2nd ed., pp. 75–91). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
6. Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Segerstrom, S. C. (2010). Optimism. Clinical Psychology Review,
30(7), 879–889.
7. Fayolle, A., & Liñán, F. (2014). The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of
Business Research, 67(5), 663–666.
8. Gorgievski, M. J., & Stephan, U. (2016). Advancing the psychology of entrepreneurship: A review
of the psychological literature and an introduction. Applied Psychology, 65(3), 437–468.
9. 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.
10. Hmieleski, K. M., & Lerner, D. A. (2020). The dark triad and nascent entrepreneurship: Unraveling
the interplay of psychological traits and behavior. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 13, e00166.
11. Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10(1–2), 18–26.
12. Kautonen, T., van Gelderen, M., & Fink, M. (2015). Robustness of the theory of planned behavior
in predicting entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(3),
655–674.
13. Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial
intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5–6), 411–432.
14. Liñán, F., & Fayolle, A. (2015). A systematic literature review on entrepreneurial intentions.
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(4), 907–933.
15. Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological Capital: Developing the Human
Competitive Edge. New York: Oxford University Press.
16. Luthans, F., Youssef-Morgan, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2019). Psychological Capital and Beyond.
New York: Oxford University Press.
17. Neneh, B. N. (2022). From entrepreneurial intentions to behavior: The role of self-efficacy and
situational factors. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 29(1), 41–64.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3279 www.rsisinternational.org
18. Newman, A., Obschonka, M., Schwarz, S., Cohen, M., & Nielsen, I. (2019). Entrepreneurial self-
efficacy: A systematic review of the literature on its antecedents and outcomes. International Journal
of Management Reviews, 21(1), 2–29.
19. Newman, A., Ucbasaran, D., Jiang, Y., & Humphreys, M. (2014). Psychological capital: A review
and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(S1), S120–S138.
20. Nowiński, W., Haddoud, M. Y., Lančarič, D., Egerová, D., & Czeglédi, C. (2019). The impact of
entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial self-efficacy and gender on entrepreneurial intentions of
university students in the Visegrad countries. Studies in Higher Education, 44(2), 361–379.
21. Olawale, F., & Garwe, D. (2023). Entrepreneurial optimism and venture success in emerging
economies: A systematic review. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research,
29(7), 1621–1638.
22. Otache, I. (2024). Do entrepreneurial self-efficacy, alertness and opportunity recognition mediate the
effect of entrepreneurship education on intention? Studies in Higher Education, 49(3), 589–605.
23. Raeis, M., Ghorbani, A., & Taghipour, A. (2024). Psychological capital and entrepreneurial action:
The mediating role of optimism. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1429983.
24. Schlaegel, C., & Koenig, M. (2014). Determinants of entrepreneurial intent: A meta-analytic test and
integration of competing models. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(2), 291–332.
25. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American
Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14.
26. Sheeran, P., & Webb, T. L. (2016). The intention–behavior gap. Social and Personality Psychology
Compass, 10(9), 503–518.
27. Shirokova, G., Osiyevskyy, O., & Bogatyreva, K. (2018). Exploring the intention–behavior link in
student entrepreneurship: The moderating role of individual and environmental characteristics.
European Management Journal, 36(4), 529–540.
28. Trevelyan, R. (2016). Self-regulation and effort in entrepreneurial tasks. International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 22(4), 449–467.
29. van Gelderen, M., Kautonen, T., & Fink, M. (2018). From entrepreneurial intentions to actions: Self-
control and action-related doubt, fear, and aversion. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(6), 760–779.
30. Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management
Review, 14(4), 490–495.
31. Yasir, N., & Majid, A. (2023). Optimism and entrepreneurial performance: The moderating role of
resilience. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 15(4), 945–963.