Sociological and theory of planned behaviour approach to understanding entrepreneurship: Comparison of Vietnam and South Korea

Figures & data

Figure 1. Research model.

Table 1. Sample characteristics

Characteristics	Vietnam (n1 = 600)		South Korea (n2 = 550)
	Frequency	Percent (%)	Frequency	Percent (%)
Gender
Female	454	75.7	289	52.5
Male	146	24.3	261	47.5
Grade
First-year	202	33.7	61	11.1
Second-year	209	34.8	87	15.8
Third-year	125	20.8	132	24.0
Fourth-year	55	9.2	177	32.2
Fifth-year	9	1.5	93	16.9
Major
Economics and Business	433	72.2	232	42.2
Social Sciences (Political Science, International Relation, Sociology, …)	137	22.8	59	10.7
Humanities and Art (Literature, Language, History, Culture, Philosophy, Music, Design …)	28	4.7	99	18.0
Natural Sciences (Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology …)	1	0.2	11	2.0
Engineering and Information technology	0	0	76	13.8
Medicine, Pharmacy and Nursing	1	0.2	73	13.3

Table 2. Reliability, validity, convergence of model constructs

	Cronbach alpha CR (AVE)			Loading
Construct	Vietnam	South Korea	Item	Vietnam	South Korea
Entrepreneurship Education (EDU)	0.775 0.767 (0.452)	0.755 0.718 (0.390)	EDU1	0.676	0.662
			EDU2	0.672	0.674
			EDU3	0.694	0.607
			EDU4	0.645	0.547
Family Support (FS)	0.763 0.760 (0.443)	0.770 0.806 (0.510)	FS1	0.639	0.685
			FS2	0.698	0.647
			FS3	0.682	0.800
			FS4	0.641	0.717
Society support (SS)	0.884 0.881 (0.481)	0.885 0.882 (0.485)	SS1	0.653	0.592
			SS2	0.608	0.648
			SS3	0.716	0.685
			SS4	0.713	0.711
			SS5	0.716	0.747
			SS6	0.691	0.682
			SS7	0.722	0.733
			SS8	0.720	0.758
Attitude towards Entrepreneurship (ATT)	0.682 0.719 (0.394)	0.866 0.875 (0.637)	ATT1	0.504	0.773
			ATT2	0.690	0.823
			ATT3	0.661	0.817
			ATT4	0.638	0.777
Subjective Norms (SN)	0.812 0.800 (0.571)	0.701 0.762 (0.521)	SN1	0.749	0.752
			SN2	0.737	0.586
			SN3	0.781	0.809
Perceived Behaviour Control (PBC)	0.738 0.723 (0.304)	0.834 0.835 (0.420)	PBC1	-	0.656
			PBC2	0.503	0.667
			PBC3	0.553	0.655
			PBC4	0.590	0.705
			PBC5	0.555	0.622
			PBC6	0.553	0.618
			PBC7	0.551	0.609
Entrepreneurial Intention (EI)	0.863 0.853 (0.537)	0.918 0.917 (0.689)	EI1	0.728	0.846
			EI2	0.780	0.858
			EI3	0.694	0.862
			EI4	0.718	0.713
			EI5	0.742	0.861
Model fit indexes
Chi-square/df	2.372	2.925
TLI	0.913	0.893
CFI	0.924	0.908
RMSEA	0.048	0.059

Table 3. SEM analysis results

Relationship			Vietnam (n1 = 600)				South Korea (n2 = 550)
			Unstandardised Coefficients	S.E	C.R.	p	Unstandardised Coefficients	S.E	C.R.	p
EDU	→	ATT	.209	.035	5.946	***	.409	.051	8.063	***
FS	→	ATT	.234	.039	6.016	***	.308	.042	7.328	***
EDU	→	PBC	.136	.099	1.379	.168	.390	.041	9.588	***
SS	→	PBC	.339	.214	1.587	.112	.157	.036	4.318	***
FS	→	SN	.285	.049	5.809	***	.456	.039	11.705	***
SS	→	SN	.348	.052	6.680	***	.117	.047	2.509	.012
ATT	→	EI	.020	.092	.215	.830	.474	.047	10.118	***
SN	→	EI	−.142	.364	−.390	.697	.282	.043	6.497	***
PBC	→	EI	1.475	.431	3.422	***	.256	.061	4.228	***
GEN	→	EI	.020	.068	.295	.768	.077	.059	1.303	.193
MAJ	→	EI	.106	.051	2.071	.038	.030	.060	.498	.618
Model fit indices			Chi-square/df = 1.391 (p = 0.000), GFI = 0.996, CFI = 0.998, RMSEA = 0.026.				Chi-square/df = 4.009 (p = 0.000), GFI = 0.984, CFI = 0.980, RMSEA = 0.074.

Table 4. Summary of hypothesis test results

Relationship	Vietnam		South Korea
	Hypothesis	Result	Hypothesis	Result
EDU → ATT	H1a	Supported	H1b	Supported
EDU → PBC	H2a	Rejected	H2b	Supported
FS → ATT	H3a	Supported	H3b	Supported
FS → SN	H4a	Supported	H4b	Supported
SS → SN	H5a	Supported	H5b	Supported
SS → PBC	H6a	Rejected	H6b	Supported
ATT → EI	H7a	Rejected	H7b	Supported
SN → EI	H8a	Rejected	H8b	Supported
PBC → EI	H9a	Supported	H9b	Supported

Table 5. Results of independent t-tests

Construct	Mean (SD)			t-value
	Total (n = 1,150)	Vietnam (n1 = 600)	South Korea (n2 = 550)
EDU	3.40 (0.70)	3.58 (0.65)	3.19 (0.70)	9.901***
FS	3.01 (0.82)	3.36 (0.63)	2.64 (0.84)	16.293***
SS	3.17 (0.67)	3.42 (0.59)	2.89 (0.65)	14.481***
ATT	3.11 (0.80)	3.32 (0.61)	2.87 (0.90)	9.691***
SN	2.70 (0.81)	2.87 (0.74)	2.52 (0.85)	7.435***
PBC	2.94 (0.69)	3.24 (0.51)	2.61 (0.72)	16.862***
EI	2.96 (1.04)	3.52 (0.72)	2.36 (1.01)	22.086***

Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

Table 6. Results of χ2 difference test between models

	χ2	df
Unconstrained model	28.660	4
Fully constrained model vs. Unconstrained model
Fully constrained model	70.364	13
Model difference	41.704	9
p-value (χ2)	0.000
FS to ATT constrained model vs. Unconstrained model
FS to ATT constrained model	31.244	5
Model difference	2.584	1
p-value (χ2)	0.000
FS to SN constrained model vs. Unconstrained model
FS to SN constrained model	36.003	5
Model difference	7.343
p-value (χ2)	0.007
SS to SN constrained model vs. Unconstrained model
SS to SN constrained model	40.048	5
Model difference	11.388	1
p-value (χ2)	0.001
SS to PBC constrained model vs Unconstrained model
SS to PBC constrained model	36.143	5
Model difference	7.483	1
p-value (χ2)	0.006