It is well known that founders typically seek assistance for their fledgling ventures, but what remains unclear are the reasons why some founders collaborate with more people than others in their startup efforts. Our study investigates the link between employment experience and the extent to which founders depend on others for assistance when starting businesses. Employment experience provides founders with opportunities to be exposed to and develop preferences for particular work environments and the conditions associated with certain organizational roles. Drawing on occupational socialization theory, we investigate why employment experience predicts founding collaboration size. Our analysis of a nationally representative sample of early-stage business founders in the United States reveals that the amount of business experience and the defining social and analytical requirements of a founder's occupational background affect the number of people founders choose to involve in their founding efforts in opposite ways: While founders possessing venture-specific industry experience are more likely to opt for solo ventures or smaller collaborations, founders with backgrounds in highly interactive occupations are more likely to recruit more collaborators as co-owners. We found this preference for collaboration is strengthened for founders with occupational backgrounds that called for both interactive and analytical work. Our findings have theoretical and practical implications on how founders' experience influences the extent to which they initiate collaborations with others.

Why are some individuals more likely to become owners of small businesses than others? We classify industries using measures of entry barriers and proceed to investigate how determinants of entry vary in high- as opposed to low-barrier fields. Claims that neither financial-capital constraints nor the educational backgrounds of aspiring small-business owners predict the likelihood of small-business entry are investigated in this context. These claims of irrelevance, we find, are inconsistent with the facts. The wealth and educational background characteristics potential entrepreneurs possess predispose them to make distinctly different industry choices, both because of the differing rewards available to them and the very different entry barriers they face. The characteristics of potential entrants, in other words, draw them toward some industries and away from others.

Publication bias (PB) exists when the published literature is not representative of the population of studies. PB has largely been ignored or dismissed in entrepreneurship research as there is a general belief that only fields entrenched in dominant theoretical paradigms are capable of suffering from PB. We tested this presumption by re-analyzing the results of 15 systematic reviews (i.e., meta-analyses) of entrepreneurial antecedents and firm performance. Using three different tests, we found some degree of PB in all but three of these analyses. Our results belie the contention that entrepreneurship is immune to PB.