This study examines the relationship between prenatal testosterone exposure (PTE) and selection into entrepreneurship. We argue that the relationship between PTE and entrepreneurial intent is positive and mediated by general and domain–specific risk–taking related to financial investment and professional career. Using the second–to–fourth digit ratio (2D:4D) as noninvasive retrospective marker for PTE, we identify two–step mediation effects of PTE on entrepreneurial intent through both general and domain–specific risk–taking. To account for possible socialization–based effects, we control for gender and parental self–employment. Applying ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analyses and structural equation models, we provide empirical evidence for a biological association between 2D:4D and entrepreneurial intent.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
2.
ApicellaC.L., DreberA., CampbellB., GrayP.B., HoffmanM., & LittleA.C. (2008). Testosterone and financial risk preferences. Evolution & Human Behavior, 29(6), 384–390.
3.
ArcherJ. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(3), 319–345.
4.
AuyeungB., Baron–CohenS., AshwinE., KnickmeyerR., TaylorK., HackettG., et al. (2009). Fetal testosterone predicts sexually differentiated childhood behavior in girls and in boys. Psychological Science, 20(2), 144–148.
5.
AuyeungB., LombardoM.V., & Baron–CohenS. (2013). Prenatal and postnatal hormone effects on the human brain and cognition. European Journal of Physiology, 465(5), 557–571.
6.
BaronR.A. (1998). Cognitive mechanisms in entrepreneurship: Why and when entrepreneurs think differently than other people. Journal of Business Venturing, 13(4), 275–294.
7.
BaronR.A. (2004). The cognitive perspective: A valuable tool for answering entrepreneurship's basic “why” questions. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(2), 221–239.
8.
Baron–CohenS., LutchmayaS., & KnickmeyerR. (2004). Prenatal testosterone in mind. Amniotic fluid studies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
9.
BaumJ.R., LockeE.A., & SmithK.G. (2001). A multidimensional model of venture growth. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 292–303.
BelloD., LeungK., RadebaughL., TungR.L., & van WitteloostuijnA. (2009). From the editors: Student samples in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 40, 361–364.
12.
BirdB.J. (1988). Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: The case for intention. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 442–453.
13.
BönteW. & PiegelerM. (2013). Gender gap in latent and nascent entrepreneurship: Driven by competitiveness. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 961–987.
14.
Bosch–DomènchA., Brañas–GarzaP., & EspínA.M. (2014). Fetal testosterone (2D:4D) as predictor of cognitive reflection. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 43, 1–10.
15.
BowenH.P. & De ClercqD. (2008). Institutional context and the allocation of entrepreneurial effort. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(4), 747–767.
16.
BrachertM. & HyllW. (2014). On the stability of preferences: Repercussions of entrepreneurship on risk attitudes. SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research, No. 667. Berlin: DIW Berlin, The German Socio–Economic Panel (SOEP).
17.
Brañas–GarzaP., KováríkJ., & NeyseL. (2013). Second–to–fourth digit ratio has a non–monotonic impact on altruism. PLoS ONE, 8(4), e60419.
18.
Brañas–GarzaP. & RustichiniA. (2011). Organizing effects of testosterone and economic behavior: Not just risk taking. PLoS ONE, 6(12), e29842.
19.
BreedloveS. & HampsonE. (2002). Sexual differentiation of the brain and behavior. In BeckerJ., BreedloveS., CrewsD., & McCarthyM. (Eds.), Behavioral endocrinology (2nd ed., pp. 75–114). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
20.
BusenitzL.W. & BarneyJ.B. (1997). Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision–making. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(1), 9–30.
21.
ByrnesJ.P., MillerD.C., & SchaferW.D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: A meta–analysis. Pyschological Bulletin, 125(3), 367–383.
22.
CaliendoM., FossenF.M., & KritikosA.S. (2009). Risk attitudes of nascent entrepreneurs–new evidence from an experimentally validated survey. Small Business Economics, 32(2), 153–167.
23.
CoatesJ.M. & PageL. (2009). A note on trader Sharpe ratios. PLoS ONE, 4(11), e8036.
24.
CohenJ., CohenP., WestS.G., & AikenL.S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25.
CrosonR. & GneezyU. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 448–474.
26.
de HolanP.M. (2014). It's all in your head: Why we need neuroentrepreneurship. Journal of Management Inquiry, 23(1), 93–97.
27.
DimovD. (2007). From opportunity insight to opportunity intention: The importance of person–situation learning match. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(4), 561–583.
28.
DohmenT., FalkA., HuffmanD., SundeU., SchuppS., & WagnerG.G. (2011). Individual risk attitudes: Measurement, determinants, and behavioral consequences. Journal of the European Economic Association, 9(4), 522–550.
29.
DouglasE. & ShepherdD. (2002). Self–employment as a career choice: Attitudes, entrepreneurial intentions, and utility maximization. Entrepreneurial Theory & Practice, 26(3), 81–90.
30.
DreberA. & HoffmanM. (2007). Portfolio selection in utero. Stockholm School of Economics. Mimeo.
31.
DresslerS.G. & VoracekM. (2011). No association between two candidate markers of prenatal sex hormones: Digit ratios (2D:4D and other) and finger–ridge counts. Developmental Psychobiology, 53(1), 69–78.
32.
DrichoutisA. & NaygaR. (2012). Do risk and time preferences have biological roots? MPRA Paper No. 37320. Munich: University Library of Munich.
33.
DunnT. & Holtz–EakinD. (2000). Financial capital, human capital and the transition to self–employment: Evidence from intergenerational links. Journal of Labor Economics, 18(2), 282–305.
34.
EckhardtJ. & ShaneS. (2010). An update to the individual–opportunity nexus. In AcsZ. & AudretschB. (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship research (2nd ed., pp. 47–76). New York: Springer.
35.
FignerB. & WeberE. (2011). Who takes risks when and why? Determinants of risk taking. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(4), 211–216.
36.
FollandJ.P., McCauleyT.M., PhypersC., HansonB., & MastanaS.S. (2012). Relationship of 2D:4D finger ratio with muscle strength, testosterone, and androgen receptor CAG repeat genotype. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 148(1), 81–87.
37.
ForlaniD. & MullinsJ.W. (2000). Perceived risks and choices in entrepreneurs’ new venture decisions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(4), 305–322.
38.
GarbarinoE., SlonimR., & SydnorJ. (2011). Digit ratios (2D:4D) as predictors of risky decision making for both sexes. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 42(1), 1–26.
39.
GoyR.W. & McEwenB.S. (1980). Sexual differentiation of the brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
40.
GuisoL. & RustichiniA. (2011a). What drives women out of entrepreneurship?The joint role of testosterone and culture. European University Institute Working Paper ECO 2011/02. Firenze, Italy: European University Institute.
41.
GuisoL. & RustichiniA. (2011b). Understanding the size and profitability of firms: The role of a biological factor. European University Institute Working Paper ECO 2011/01. 02. Firenze, Italy: European University Institute.
42.
HanochY., JohnsonJ.G., & WilkeA. (2006). Domain specificity in experimental measures and participant recruitment: An application to risk–taking behavior. Psychological Science, 17(4), 300–304.
43.
Higher Education Statistics Agency. (2015). UK performance indicators. Available at https://www.hesa.ac.uk, accessed 21 July 2014.
44.
HinesM. (2010). Sex–related variation in human behavior and the brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(10), 448–456.
45.
HmieleskiK.M. & CorbettA.C. (2006). Proclivity for improvisation as a predictor of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(1), 45–63.
46.
HönekoppJ., BartholdtL., BeierL., & LiebertA. (2007). Second to fourth digit length ratio (2D:4D) and adult sex hormone levels: New data and a meta–analytic review. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 32(4), 313–321.
47.
HönekoppJ. & WatsonS. (2010). Meta–analysis of digit ratio (2D:4D) shows greater sex difference in the right hand. American Journal of Human Biology, 22(5), 619–630.
48.
KihlstromR.E. & LaffontJ.J. (1979). A general equilibrium theory of firm formation based on risk aversion. Journal of Political Economy, 87(4), 719–748.
49.
KlapperL.F. & ParkerS.C. (2011). Gender and the business environment for new firm creation. The World Bank Research Observer, 26(2), 237–257.
50.
KnightF. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
51.
KolvereidL. & IsaksenE. (2006). New business start–up and subsequent entry into self–employment. Journal of Business Venturing, 21, 866–885.
52.
KruegerN.F., ReillyM.D., & CarsrudA.L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5), 411–432.
53.
LaspitaS., BreugstN., HeblichS., & PatzeltH. (2012). Intergenerational transmission of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(4), 414–435.
54.
Laureiro–MartínezD., BrusoniS., CanessaN., & ZolloM. (2015). Understanding the exploration–exploitation dilemma: An fMRI study of attention control and decision–making performance. Strategic Management Journal, 36(3), 319–338.
55.
LilesP.R. (1974). New business ventures and the entrepreneur. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
56.
LindquistM.J., SolJ., & van PraagM. (2012). Why do entrepreneurial parents have entrepreneurial children? IZA Discussion Paper, No. 6740. Bonn: IZA.
57.
LombardoM.V., AshwinE., AuyeungB., ChakrabartiB., TaylorK., HackettG., et al. (2012). Fetal testosterone influences sexually dimorphic gray matter in the human brain. Journal of Neuroscience, 32(2), 674–680.
58.
LutchmayaS., Baron–CohenS., RaggattP., KnickmeyerR., & ManningJ.T. (2004). 2nd to 4th digit ratios, fetal testosterone and estradiol. Early Human Development, 77(1/2), 23–28.
59.
ManningJ.T. (2002). Digit ratio: A pointer to fertility, behavior, and health. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
60.
ManningJ.T. & FinkB. (2008). Digit ratio (2D:4D), dominance, reproductive success, asymmetry, and sociosexuality in the BBC Internet Study. American Journal of Human Biology, 20(4), 451–461.
61.
ManningJ.T., KilduffL., CookC., CrewtherB., & FinkB. (2014). Digit ratio (2D:4D): A biomarker for prenatal sex steroids and adult sex steroids in challenge situations. Frontiers in Endocrinology, 5. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2014.00009.
62.
ManningJ.T. & PetersM. (2009). Digit ratio (2D:4D) and hand preference for writing in the BBC Internet Study. Laterality, 14(5), 528–540.
63.
ManningJ.T., ScuttD., WilsonJ., & Lewis–JonesD.I. (1998). The ratio of 2nd to 4th digit length: A predictor of sperm numbers and concentrations of testosterone, luteinizing hormone and oestrogen. Human Reproduction, 13(11), 3000–3004.
64.
McIntyreM.H., CohnB.A., & EllisonP.T. (2006). Sex dimorphism in the digital formulae of children. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 129(1), 143–150.
65.
MedlandS.E. & LoehlinJ.C. (2008). Multivariate genetic analyses of the 2D:4D ratio: Examining the effects of hand and measurement technique in data from 757 twin families. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 11(3), 335–341.
66.
MedlandS.E., ZayatsT., GlaserB., NyholtD.R., GordonS.D., WrightM.J., et al. (2010). A variant in LIN28B is associated with 2D:4D finger–length ratio, a putative retrospective biomarker of prenatal testosterone exposure. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 86(4), 519–525.
67.
MinerJ.B. & RajuN.S. (2004). Risk propensity differences between managers and entrepreneurs and between low– and high–growth entrepreneurs: A reply in a more conservative vein. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 3–13.
68.
MinnitiM. & NardoneC. (2007). Being in someone else's shoes: The role of gender in nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 28(2/3), 223–238.
69.
NicholsonN., SoaneE., Fenton–O'CreevyM., & WillmanP. (2005). Personality and domain–specific risk taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8(2), 157–176.
70.
NicolaouN. & ShaneS. (2014). Biology, neuroscience, and entrepreneurship. Journal of Management Inquiry, 23(1), 98–100.
71.
NicolaouN., ShaneS., CherkasL., HunkinJ., & SpectorT. (2008). Is the tendency to engage in entrepreneurship genetic?Management Science, 54(1), 167–179.
72.
ObschonkaM., SilbereisenR., Schmitt–RodermundE., & StuetzerM. (2011). Nascent entrepreneurship and the developing individual: Early entrepreneurial competence in adolescence and venture creation success during the career. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(1), 121–133.
73.
PalichL.E. & BagbyD.R. (1995). Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk taking: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(6), 425–438.
74.
ParkerS. (2009). Economics of entrepreneurship. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
75.
PaulS.N., KatoB.S., CherkasL.F., AndrewT., & SpectorT.D. (2006). Heritability of the second–to–fourth digit ratio (2D:4D): A twin study. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 9(2), 215–219.
76.
PearsonM. & SchipperB.C. (2012). The visible hand: Finger ratio (2D:4D) and competitive bidding. Experimental Economics, 15(3), 510–529.
77.
PhoenixC.H., GoyR.W., GerallA.A., & YoungW.C. (1959). Organizing action of prenatally administered testosterone propionate on the tissues mediating mating behavior in the female guinea pig. Endocrinology, 65(3), 369–382.
78.
PreacherK.J. & HayesA.F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.
79.
RauchA. & FreseM. (2007). Let's put the person back into entrepreneurship research: A meta–analysis on the relationship between business owners’ personality traits, business creation, and success. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 16(4), 353–385.
80.
RauchA. & FreseM. (2012). Born to be an entrepreneur? Revisiting the personality approach to entrepreneurship. In BaumJ.R., FreseM., & BaronR. (Eds.), The psychology of entrepreneurship (pp. 41–66). Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
81.
RomanoM., RuboliniD., MartinelliR., Bonisoli AlquatiA., & SainomN. (2005). Experimental manipulation of yolk testosterone affects digit length ratios in the ring–necked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus). Hormones and Behavior, 48(3), 342–346.
82.
RotterJ. (1975). Some problems and misconceptions related to the construct of internal versus external control of reinforcement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43(1), 56–67.
83.
RuefM., AldrichH.E., & CarterN.C. (2003). The structure of founding teams: Homophily, strong ties, and isolation among U.S. entrepreneurs. American Sociological Review, 68(2), 195–222.
84.
SapienzaP., ZingalesL., & MaestripieriD. (2009). Gender differences in financial risk aversion and career choices are affected by testosterone. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(36), 15268–15273.
85.
SchererR., AdamsJ., CarleyS., & WiebeF. (1989). Role model performance effects on the development of entrepreneurial career preference. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 13, 53–81.
86.
SchipperB.C. (2014). Sex hormones and choice under risk. Working Papers 147. Davis, CA: University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
87.
SchmidtF.L. & HunterJ.E. (1996). Measurement error in psychological research: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 199–223.
88.
ShaneS. (2003). A general theory of entrepreneurship—The individual–opportunity nexus. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
89.
ShaneS. & VenkataramanS. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.
90.
ShookC.L., PriemR.L., & McGeeJ.E. (2003). Venture creation and the enterprising individual: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 29(3), 379–399.
91.
SørensenJ.B. (2007). Closure and exposure: Mechanisms in the intergenerational transmission of self–employment. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 25, 83–124.
92.
SouitarisV., ZerbinatiS., & Al–LahamA. (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.
93.
StenstromE., SaadG., NepomucenoM.V., & MendenhallZ. (2011). Testosterone and domain–specific risk: Digit ratios (2D:4D and rel2) as predictors of recreational, financial and social risk–taking behaviors. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(4), 412–416.
94.
StewartW.H. & RothP. (2001). Risk propensity differences between entrepreneurs and managers: A meta–analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 145–153.
95.
ThompsonE.R. (2009). Individual entrepreneurial intent: Construct clarification and development of an internationally reliable metric. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 669–694.
96.
TrahmsC.A., CoombsJ.E., & BarrickM. (2010). Does biology matter? How prenatal testosterone, entrepreneur risk propensity, and entrepreneur risk perception influence venture performance. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 30(5), article 4.
97.
TriversR., ManningJ., & JacobsonA. (2006). A longitudinal study of digit ratio (2D:4D) and other finger ratios in Jamaican children. Hormones and Behavior, 49(2), 150–156.
98.
UngerJ.M., RauchA., NarayananJ., WeisS., & FreseM. (2009). Does prenatal testosterone predict entrepreneurial success? Relationships of 2D:4D and business success (summary). Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 29(5), article 15.
99.
van der LoosM.J.H.M., HaringR., RietveldC.A., BaumeisterS.E., GroenenP.J., HofmanA., et al. (2013). Serum testosterone in males are not associated with entrepreneurial behavior in two independent observational studies. Physiology & Behavior, 119(2), 110–114.
100.
van HonkJ., MontoyaE.R., BosP.A., van VugtM., & TerburgD. (2012). New evidence on testosterone and cooperation. Nature, 485, E4–E5.
101.
VenkataramanS. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. In KatzJ. (Ed.), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence and growth (Vol. 3, pp. 119–138). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
102.
VerheulI., ThurikR., GriloI., & van der ZwanP. (2012). Explaining preferences and actual involvement in self–employment: Gender and the entrepreneurial personality. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(2), 325–341.
103.
VoracekM. & DresslerS.G. (2007). Digit ratio (2D:4D) in twins: Heritability estimates and evidence for a masculinized trait expression in women from opposite sex pairs. Psychological Reports, 100(1), 115–126.
104.
VoracekM. & DresslerS.G. (2009). Brief communication: Familial resemblance in digit ratio (2D:4D). American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 140(2), 376–380.
105.
WeissS.E., FirkerA., & HennigJ. (2007). Associations between the second and fourth digit ratio and career interests. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(3), 485–493.
106.
WhiteR.E., ThornhillS., & HampsonE. (2006). Entrepreneurs and evolutionary biology: The relationship between testosterone and new venture creation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 21–34.
107.
WhiteR.E., ThornhillS., & HampsonE. (2007). A biosocial model of entrepreneurship: The combined effects of nurture and nature. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(4), 451–566.
108.
WilsonF., KickulJ., & MarlinoD. (2007). Gender, entrepreneurial self–efficacy and entrepreneurial career intentions: Implications for entrepreneurship education. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(3), 387–406.
109.
ZellwegerT., SiegerP., & HalterF. (2011). Should I stay or should I go? Career choice intentions of students with family business background. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(5), 521–536.
110.
ZhaoH., SeibertS.E., & HillsG.E. (2005). The mediating role of self–efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1265–1272.
111.
ZhaoH., SeibertS.E., & LumpkinG.T. (2010). The relationship of personality to entrepreneurial intentions and performance: A meta–analytic review. Journal of Management, 36(2), 381–404.
112.
ZhengZ. & CohnM.J. (2011). Development basis of sexually dimorphic digit ratios. PNAS, 108(39), 16289–16294.
