Small business survival and sample selection bias

By H. Cader, J. Leatherman. 2011

131 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/08ae82afb0f7e1f1d43836909dbe9c35aaedcaf3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

1. Régis Blazy
2. Tristan Boyer
3. Begoña Gutiérrez-Nieto
4. Carlos Serrano-Cinca
5. Ari Hyytinen
6. Petri Rouvinen
7. Luz López-Palacios
8. Mika Pajarinen

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Begoña Gutiérrez-Nieto
2. Carlos Serrano-Cinca
3. Régis Blazy
4. Tristan Boyer
5. Ari Hyytinen
6. Petri Rouvinen
7. Luz López-Palacios
8. Mika Pajarinen

In Management of Technology and Innovation

1. Régis Blazy
2. Tristan Boyer
3. Ari Hyytinen
4. Petri Rouvinen
5. Mika Pajarinen
6. Frank J. van Rijnsoever

Citations in the corpus

• Born to be alive? The survival of innovative and non-innovative French micro-start-ups (2014, background): “When the analyzed sample covers very small firms, innovation even becomes a negative factor for their development (Reid & Smith, 2000): two-year (Buddelmeyer et al. , 2010) and five-year survival rates (Cader & Leatherman, 2011) of small innovative enterprises are below those of noninnovators.”
• Determinants of Default in P2P Lending (2015, background): “Cader and Leatherman [57] found that more than 40% of the firms did not survive after 3 years, using a sample of 90,134 observations.”
• Does innovativeness reduce startup survival rates (2015, background): “More recently, Cader and Leatherman (2011) have analyzed the survival of new US establishments entering themarketplace from 1990 to 1998.”