Keywords

Entrepreneurship, Family, Family Business, Latin America, Systematic Review.

Introduction

Academics in the field of business sciences have been studying the elements that encourage entrepreneurship, identifying both inspiring and demotivating elements that influence the decision to begin this activity (Cunha et al., 2020; Kibler et al., 2019; Staniewski & Awruk, 2019; To et al., 2020).

In many regions of the world, conclusive research have been undertaken to discover which factors encourage entrepreneurship in diverse populations, which vary based on the geographical and temporal setting. Some of these empirical studies are those reported by Ambati (2020) in India, Sesen & Ekemen (2020) and Bilgiseven & Kasimoǧlu (2019) in Turkey, Nguyen et al. (2019) in Vietnam, Mat et al. (2015) in Malaysia, and Rachmania et al. (2012) in Indonesia.

According to (Terán & Guerrero, 2020), a variety of entrepreneurship theories have been established, which may be divided into four categories based on the point of view or stream.

Classical theory, neoclassical theory, Schumpeter's innovation theory, Leibenstein's x- efficiency theory, Mark Casson's theory, Papanek and Harris' theory, Hardvard School's theory, Kirzner's adjustment theory, Knight's profit theory, and Hayek's market equilibrium theory, to name a few,are all relevant from an economic standpoint.

The theory of personality traits, the locus of control theory, the need for achievement theory, and the theoryof personal ingenuity, among others, are all applicable from a psychological standpoint.

Religious belief theory, integrative supply theory, social change theory, group level pattern theory, Hoselitz theory, Stoke theory, and anthropological theory, on the other hand, are all sociological theories.

Finally, the opportunity-based theory, resource-based theory, financial capital and liquidity theory, social capital or social network theory, and human capital entrepreneurship theory are identified from an entrepreneurial standpoint.

While it is true that there are various theories that attempt to explain the motivational elements for entrepreneurship, some authors claim that empirical study on the subject is still in its infancy (Davidsson et al., 2001).

Seed capital is critical to the success of any business (Cai et al., 2018; Gedik et al., 2015). There is plenty of evidence that it is a significant barrier to the initiation and achievement of entrepreneurial activities (Cagetti & De Nardi, 2006; Evans & Jovanovic, 1989), and that its volume may even have an impact on business outcomes (McKenzie & Sansone, 2019). On the other hand, there is conclusive evidence that ventures founded by women typically begin with small amounts of capital (Honjo, 2021).

The concept of the family is universal and historical in the sense that it has always existed (Elena & Pérez, 2017). Regardless of its classification (Martnez Vasallo, 2015), it is important to note that one of its main characteristics is that it serves as the first school of language, communication, values, norms of conduct, rights and duties as a human being, as well as a space of social and economic support generated by the bonds between its members (Oliva Gómez & Villa Guardiola, 2014).

The family as a group is usually always attentive to its members in terms of the happiness of the individuals who comprise it (Margolis & Myrskylä, 2013). Although there is no universal agreement on the most important factors that contribute to self-satisfaction, nearly all researchers agree that economic conditions, family circumstances, health, and work are all important factors (Cummins, 2006; Easterlin, 1995; Salvatore et al., 2001; Van Praag et al., 2003).

At the entrepreneurial level, it is well understood that the family is frequently an important support point in entrepreneurship, providing initial support and continuing to motivate its continuation over time (Xu et al., 2020). Throughout an individual's life, any act of family support can generate feelings of gratitude, which are defined as an emotional or affective state that arises when an individual recognizes that he or she has obtained an outcome personally valued as positive from an external source (Ma et al., 2017; McCullough et al., 2002).

Because the literature on this topic is limited, especially in the scientific literature, it is necessary to compile experiences of family support for the success of entrepreneurship in Latin American countries in accordance with the support function identified in the family.

As for the general problem of this investigation, it was: What is the evidence of family support for successful entrepreneurship in Latin America in the Scopus database?

For following specific problems were formulated: in which scientific journals has evidence of family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America been published in the Scopus database; in which geographical areas has evidence of family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America been generated in the Scopus database; with what methodological approach has research evidencing family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America been conducted in the Scopus database; what are the findings on family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America in the Scopus database?

And so, the objectives of this investigation were:

General Objective

1. To identify what is the evidence of family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America in the Scopus database.
2. Specific objectives:
3. To identify in which scientific journals evidence of family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America has been published in the Scopus database.
4. To identify in which geographic areas evidence of family support for successful entrepreneurship in Latin America has been generated in the Scopus database.
5. To identify the methodological approach used to conduct research on family support for successful entrepreneurship in Latin America in the Scopus database.
6. To identify the conclusions on family support for the success of business entrepreneurship in Latin America in the Scopus database.

Materials and Method

In order to answer the research questions posed in the introduction section and to fulfill the objectives, we chose to conduct a systematic review.

The process that is usually followed includes seven steps (Kitchenham, 2004):

1. Specification of the research questions.
2. Search in databases.
3. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
4. Selection of studies.
5. Data analysis and extraction.
6. Results and interpretation of results.
7. Final conclusions.

Specification of the Research Questions

As specified in the introductory section, the research questions are: What is the evidence of family support for successful entrepreneurship in Latin America in the Scopus database? in which scientific journals has evidence of family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America been published in the Scopus database; in which geographical areas has evidence of family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America been generated in the Scopus database; with what methodological approach has research evidencing family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America been conducted in the Scopus database; what are the findings on family support for successful entrepreneurial entrepreneurship in Latin America in the Scopus database?

Database Search

(Petticrew & Roberts, 2006) recommend that database searches should be multiple, usingthe various existing names for the same phenomenon. Thus, two searches were carried out

1. "Family" and "entrepreneurship"
2. "Family" and "entrepreneur"

Table 1 details each of the names associated with the same phenomenon, together with a code assigned by the researcher.

Table 1 Thematic Code and Search
Thematic Code	Search
A	"Family" and "entrepreneurship"
B	"Family" and "entrepreneur"

It was deemed convenient to carry out searches in databases specialized in high-level scientific literature, in this case Scopus.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

In order to obtain search results that respond to the research questions, in accordance with the PRISMA methodology (Liberati et al., 2009; Moher et al., 2009), inclusion and exclusion criteria were established.

Inclusion criteria:

1. Only scientific articles were included.
2. Scientific articles disclosed between 2016 and 2020 were included.
3. Scientific articles published in English language were included.
4. Scientific articles catalogued in the “management and accounting” discipline wereincluded.
5. Scientific articles from Latin American countries were included.

Exclusion criteria:

1. Any scientific dissemination that is not in the format of scientific articles (books,theses, dissertations, manuals, etc.) was excluded.
2. All research published in 2010 or before; or from 2021 onwards was excluded.
3. All search results in languages other than English were excluded.
4. Any search result other than the discipline "management and accounting" wasexcluded.
5. Scientific articles from non-Latin American countries were excluded.

Study Selection

The strategy for study selection was to adhere strictly to the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

The searches were carried out on January 1, 2021.

Two searches were performed in the Scopus database: one with subject code A ("Family" and "entrepreneurship") and the other with subject code B ("Family" and "entrepreneur").

The first search resulted in an initial 2,441 records, of which 6 final records were identifiedafter applying exclusion and inclusion criteria. As for the second search, the initial records amounted to 2,548 and the final ones to 4 (see Table 2).

Table 3 Evidence Identified
Code	Citation	Tittle
A1	(Ferreira et al., 2018)	A look at women’s transition from formal labor to self-employment based on endogenous stimuli
A2	(Santos et al., 2020)	Individual absorptive capacity and entrepreneurial intention in successors of rural properties
A3	(Bandieri & Almaraz, 2020)	Business families in Southern Patagonia: from the end of the 19th Century to the first decades of 20th century
A4	(Alvarado Lagunas et al., 2018)	Factors that influence the continuity and survival of a micro-business in Mexico
A5	(Delfín Ruiz et al., 2020)	Family-functionality-strategy-for-the-generation-of- social-entrepreneurship-in-Mexico
A6	(Padovez-Cualheta et al., 2019)	An entrepreneurial career impacts on job and family satisfaction
B1	(Machado et al., 2013)	Creation of enterprises by women: a study with entrepreneurs in Natal, Rio Grande do Norte
B2	(Silva et al., 2016)	Microbusiness development and quality of life of Micro entrepreneurs’s families
B3	(Corrêa & Teixeira, 2015)	Entrepreneurial social networks to obtain resourcesand organizational legitimacy Multiple cases study with social entrepreneurs
B4	(Elizundia Cisneros, 2015)	New business performance: gender perspective

In order to provide a better understanding of the study selection flow, it was deemed convenient to use the PRISMA diagram (Liberati et al., 2009; Moher et al., 2009), as shown in Figure 1.

The following data were identified:

1. Article citation: in order to respond to the general objective.
2. Year of publication: in order to respond to the general objective.
3. Scientific journal where the study was published: in order to respond to specificobjective 1.
4. Geographical area: in order to respond to specific objective 2.
5. Methodological approach: in order to respond to specific objective 3.
6. Conclusions: in order to answer the specific objective 4.

Evidence Identified

Table 3 provides details of the evidence identified regarding family support for successful entrepreneurship in Latin America.

Table 4 Scientific Journals where the Identified Evidence was Published
Code	Scientific journal
A1	Revista de Administração Mackenzie
A2	Revista de Administração Mackenzie
A3	Journal of Evolutionary Studies in Business
A4	Contaduría y Administración
A5	Revista Venezolana de Gerencia
A6	RAUSP Management Journal
B1	Revista de Administração Mackenzie
B2	Revista de Administração Mackenzie
B3	Revista de Administração Mackenzie
B4	Contaduría y Administración

According to Table 3, a total of 10 search results were obtained in accordance with the research objectives, identifying the works of (Alvarado Lagunas et al., 2018; Bandieri & Almaraz, 2020; Corrêa & Teixeira, 2015; Delfín Ruiz et al., 2020; Elizundia Cisneros, 2015; Ferreira et al., 2018; Machado et al., 2013; Padovez-Cualheta et al., 2019; Santos et al., 2020; Silva et al., 2016).

Scientific Journals where the Identified Evidence was Published

Table 4 presents the Latin American scientific journals in which the scientific evidence was disclosed.

Table 5 Geographic Area from which the Scientific Evidence was Extracted
Code	Country	Province or region
A1	Brazil	Espírito Santo
A2	Brazil	Santa Catarina
A3	Chile	Punta Arenas (Southern Patagonia)
A4	Mexico	The whole country
A5	Mexico	Not identified
A6	Brazil	Not identified
B1	Brazil	Natal, Rio Grande do Norte
B2	Brazil	Minas Gerais
B3	Brazil	Aracaju, Sergipe
B4	Mexico	The whole country

It is important to note that, according to Table 4, the vast majority of studies that refer to the role of the family in entrepreneurship were published in the Revista de Administração Mackenzie, Brazil.

Geographic Area from Which the Scientific Evidence was Extracted

Table 5 and Figure 2 present the geographic area from which the scientific evidence was extracted.

Table 6 Methodological Aspects of the Evidence Identified
Code	Approach	Level	Method and techniques
A1	Qualitative	Exploratory	An interview was conducted, followed by a narrative analysis of the responses of 12 female entrepreneurs ranging in age from 28 to 47 years.
A2	Quantitative	Explanatory	A survey of 84 rural crop successors was conducted, followed by a Kruskal- Wallis statistical analysis with Dunn's post hoc adjustment byBenjamini- FDR Hochberg's method, Spearman's correlation, and structural equation modeling with partial least squares estimation.
A3	Qualitative	Exploratory	A thorough biographical and historical examination was provided. Biographies, public records, directories, bulletins and yearbooks, personal letters, and specialized bibliography were used as primary and secondary sources.
A4	Quantitative	Descriptive	The authors analyzed documents published by ENAMIN in 2012, which is a national survey conducted by Mexico's statistical agency in charge of statistics. The findings include information on approximately 27,000 microenterprise owners, with 24,975 observations identified with data that allowed analysis of the family conditions that motivated entrepreneurship.
A5	Qualitative	Exploratory	An in-depth interview was conducted with a sample of 43 people from a decentralized public social assistance institution.
A6	Quantitative	Explanatory	Three questionnaires ("An Index of Job Satisfaction," "Family Satisfaction Scale," and "Interrole Conflict Scale") were used and electronically distributed to the target population, yielding a total of 101 valid observations. The data were coded and ordered before being subjected to statistical analysis using linear regression to validate or reject each of the authors' hypotheses.
B1	Quantitative	Descriptive	A structured questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of 96 female entrepreneurs. Data was analyzed and presented using descriptive statistics, linear correlation, and cluster analysis.
B2	Quantitative	Exploratory	A questionnaire was distributed to 250 people who applied for microcredits from a Brazilian banking institution. This questionnaire sought to learn about the respondents' profiles, their interactions with the credit market, information on economic activity and perceived changes following access to microcredit, as well as questions about changes in the respondents' families' quality of life. A survey was used as the method.
B3	Qualitative	Exploratory	Three research subjects were used in a multiple case study. Three entrepreneurs were chosen who founded social enterprises and are well- known in their cities for their high-level social work and management. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data, and the conversations were recorded and later transcribed. The interviews' content was analyzed using the content analysis technique.
B4	Quantitative	Comparative	A questionnaire was distributed to 192 entrepreneurs, who are the ownersof businesses with fewer than 15 employees. Pearson's correlation, Pearson's Chi-square, and Student's T were used to identify significant differences in the motivations and influencing factors behind male andfemale entrepreneurship.

According to Table 5, 60% of the evidence identified came from Brazil, 30% from Mexico and 10% from Chile. No evidence from other Latin American countries was found after the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Table 6 reports the methodological aspects of the evidence identified, clearly showing the approach, level, and statistical method and technique.

Table 7 Conclusions of the Evidence Identified
Code	Conclusions
A1	For the vast majority of respondents, family was the most powerful motivator for starting a business. Respondents who were new mothers found time flexibility to attend to their children due to the schedulesset in their ventures, allowing them to have their children close by. It was also discovered that the partner (who usually has a stable job and invests money) provides emotional support to the entrepreneur woman, who tries to show gratitude for the support by remaining consistent in the venture.
A2	Family succession is critical to the survival and success of land cultivation businesses in Santa Catarina (Brazil), which is why many landowners instill in their children a positive attitude toward the land they will inherit and manage one day. Young heirs, aware of the responsibility bestowed upon them, typicallypursue higher education to improve the productivity of the inherited farm in order to repay the family for the trust bestowed upon them.
A3	The family, as an organization, was critical for the first migrants from Punta Arenas to survive and grow in this strange environment. As the generations passed, the families with the most seniority became more influential in the community.
A4	The most common reasons for starting a microenterprise are to increase family income (22%), supplement family income (26%), and continue with the family business (6%). It is clear that, despite notactively participating in the entrepreneurship, the family is usually the primary motivator for those who decide to start a microenterprise.
A5	The findings revealed the presence of 711 quotations in the discourse of the research participants (mostly referring to "family support," "family communication," and "family structure"), demonstrating the presence of the family in entrepreneurship motivations.
A6	Entrepreneurship has a positive impact on job and family satisfaction, and entrepreneurs outperform non- entrepreneurs in this regard.
B1	According to the study, there are three main reasons for starting a business: the desire to earn a lot of money, dissatisfaction with previous work, and the desire to earn a specific amount of money. The most common barriers to starting a business were a lack of business experience, young children (family), a lack of time to participate in networks, and a difficulty obtaining start-up capital. However, a lack offunds is usually compensated for by family and friends.
B2	The business management factor was discovered to have a positive impact on media access, leisure, and quality of life. Access to media and leisure activities improves one's quality of life. When the variables used here are linked in a predicate form, they explain 54% of the change in the beneficiary families' quality of life.
B3	In the entrepreneurs' social networks, both weak and strong ties were observed. The strong ties were primarily between family members, friends, and professional colleagues. In terms of weak ties, public and private companies, as well as individual donors/collaborators, were mentioned. Strong ties, in particular, fostered practically all types of resources required for the conceptualization of the social organizations under consideration. Weak ties, on the other hand, promoted a large portion of the physical resources required by the organizations studied.
B4	Men and women have similar motivations for starting a business. In terms of the difficulty of starting a business, it was discovered that the initial capital required by women is significantly lower than that required by men. External financing is also typically lower for women than for men, owing to their credit history and pre-entrepreneurial income. It is concluded that in order to achieve parity in start-up capital, women seek family support, further strengthening their family ties.

It is important to emphasize that, according to Table 6, there is no clearly defined trend regarding the way to explore the phenomenon of entrepreneurship facilitated by family support.

Conclusions of the Scientific Evidence Identified

Table 7 presents the conclusions of the scientific evidence identified.

Final Conclusions

Ten scientific evidences of family support for entrepreneurship success in Latin America were identified (Alvarado Lagunas et al., 2018; Bandieri & Almaraz, 2020; Corrêa & Teixeira, 2015; Delfn Ruiz et al., 2020; Elizundia Cisneros, 2015; Ferreira et al., 2018; Machado et al., 2013; Padovez-Cualheta e

The evidence gathered indicates that the cases are primarily from Brazil, and they are being published in the Revista de Administraço Mackenzie, which is positioning itself as the primary source of scientific dissemination in the research field.

Although no trend in relation to the methodological approach used to approach this thematic of studies was identified, it was possible to identify that regardless of this, information on how family support creates a motivating environment for the initiation or continuation of entrepreneurial activities can be obtained. This information is provided in greater detail below.

Family Support and Motivation to Initiate Entrepreneurial Activities

Sometimes, new mothers see entrepreneurship as a way to continue their entrepreneurial lives with more flexible schedules and the partner as emotional support (Ferreira et al., 2018). This research adds to the findings of (Delfn Ruiz et al., 2020; Padovez-Cualheta et al., 2019) that personal satisfaction is generated by feeling the support of one's family.

Although it is true that the difference in initial capital at the start of entrepreneurial activities is usually a barrier that leads to unfavorable financial results, it has been identified that family support through money loans is an alternative to which entrepreneurs turn (Corrêa & Teixeira, 2015; Elizundia Cisneros, 2015; Machado et al., 2013), generating feelings of gratification (Ferreira et al., 2018).

It is also natural for the individuals who comprise the family to seek the fulfillment of each of its members, motivating them to generate extra income through entrepreneurship in order to provide them with a better quality of life, as seen in the chaos exposed by (Alvarado Lagunas et al., 2018; Silva et al., 2016).

Family Support and Motivation towards Family Succession of Entrepreneurship

The search for scientific evidence also resulted in the identification of cases in which young people took over ventures begun by their parents and grandparents.

The case studied by (Santos et al., 2020) demonstrated how, in agricultural areas, descendants of the first settlers, aware of the great responsibility that comes with leading such crops in the future, seek to professionalize themselves in order to be ready to take over the familybusiness when the time comes. In this case, the children's gratitude to their forefathers for the trustplaced in them is palpable.

Similar cases are presented by (Bandieri & Almaraz, 2020), where the first landowners of Punta Arenas (Brazil) have managed to position their families as referents in the area, through the growth of their businesses by means of family inheritance.

Funding Statement and Acknowledgments

This study was carried out and funded by the Universidad Señor de Sipán, within the framework of the work plan outlined in RR N° 016-2021/USS. The presented results are the result of the development of research project N° 3, which was approved with RR N° 038-2021/USS.

References

1. Alvarado Lagunas, E., Dávila Aguirre, M.C., & Vázquez Zacarías, M.A. (2018). Factores que influyen en la continuidad y sobrevivencia de un micronegocio en México. Contaduría y Administración, 63(3), 46. https://doi.org/10.22201/fca.24488410e.2018.1281
2. Ambati, N.R. (2020). Motivating factors of social entrepreneurs: Evidences from Gujarat, India. Materials
3. Today:Proceedings,37(2), 3393-3403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.276
4. Bandieri, S., & Almaraz, A. (2020). Business families in southern patagonia: From the end of the 19th century to the first decades of 20th century. Journal of Evolutionary Studies in Business, 5(2), 33-79. https://doi.org/10.1344/jesb2020.2.j076
5. Bilgiseven, E.B., & Kasimoǧlu, M. (2019). Analysis of Factors Leading to Entrepreneurial Intention. Procedia Computer Science, 158, 885-890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.127
6. Cagetti, M., & De Nardi, M. (2006). Entrepreneurship, Frictions, and Wealth. Journal of Political Economy, 114(5), 835-870. https://doi.org/10.1086/508032
7. Cai, D., Song, Q., Ma, S., Dong, Y., & Xu, Q. (2018). The relationship between credit constraints and household entrepreneurship in China. International Review of Economics and Finance, 58(1), 246-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2018.03.024
8. Corrêa, R.O., & Teixeira, R.M. (2015). Redes Sociais Empreendedoras Para Obtenção De Recursos E Legitimação Organizacional: Estudo De Casos Múltiplos Com Empreendedores Sociais. Revista de Administracao Mackenzie, 16(1), 62-95. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-69712015/administracao.v16n1p62-95
9. Cummins, R.A. (2006). The Domains of Life Satisfaction: An Attempt to Order Chaos. Citation Classics from Social Indicators Research, June, 559-584. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3742-2_19
10. Cunha, C., Kastenholz, E., & Carneiro, M.J. (2020). Entrepreneurs in rural tourism: Do lifestyle motivations contribute to management practices that enhance sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems? Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44(1), 215-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.06.007
11. Davidsson, P., Low, M.B., & Wright, M. (2001). Editor’s Introduction: Low and MacMillan Ten Years On: Achievements and Future Directions for Entrepreneurship Research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(4), 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225870102500401
12. Delfín Ruiz, C., Cano Guzmán, R., & Peña Valencia, E. J. (2020). Family functionality strategy for the generation of social entrepreneurship in Mexico. Revista Venezolana de Gerencia, 25(89), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.37960/revista.v25i89.31387
13. Easterlin, R. (1995). Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all ? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 27(1), 35-47.
14. Elena, M., & Pérez, B. (2017). La familia: Desde lo tradicional a lo discutible. Novedades en Población, 13(26), 58- 68. Elizundia Cisneros, M.E. (2015). Desempeño de nuevos negocios: Perspectiva de género. Contaduria y Administracion,
15. 60(2), 468-485. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0186-1042(15)30010-3
16. Evans, D.S., & Jovanovic, B. (1989). An Estimated Model of Entrepreneurial Choice under Liquidity Constraints.
17. Journal of Political Economy, 97(4), 808-827. https://doi.org/10.1086/261629
18. Ferreira, G.F., Bastos, S.A.P., & D’Angelo, M.J. (2018). A look at women’s transition from formal labor to self- employment based on endogenous stimuli. Revista de Administracao Mackenzie, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-6971/eRAMG180086
19. Gedik, Ş., Miman, M., & Kesici, M.S. (2015). Characteristics and Attitudes of Entrepreneurs Towards Entrepreneurship.ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, 195(1), 1087-1096.
20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.153
21. Honjo, Y. (2021). The impact of founders’ human capital on initial capital structure: Evidence from Japan.
22. Technovation,100(1), 102191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102191
23. Kibler, E., Wincent, J., Kautonen, T., Cacciotti, G., & Obschonka, M. (2019). Can prosocial motivation harm entrepreneurs’ subjective well-being? Journal of Business Venturing, 34(4), 608-624.
24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.10.003
25. Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for performing systematic reviews. In Procedures  for performing systematic reviews. Keele University.
26. Liberati, A., Altman, D.G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P.C., Ioannidis, J.P.A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P.J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000100. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
27. Ma, L.K., Tunney, R.J., & Ferguson, E. (2017). Supplemental Material for Does Gratitude Enhance Prosociality?: A Meta-Analytic Review. Psychological Bulletin, 143(6), 601-635. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000103.supp
28. Machado, H.P.V., Gazola, S., & Anez, M.E.M. (2013). Criação de empresas por mulheres: um estudo com empreendedoras em Natal, Rio Grande do Norte. RAM. Revista de Administração Mackenzie, 14(5), 177- 200.
29. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-69712013000500007
30. Margolis, R., & Myrskylä, M. (2013). Family, money, and health: Regional differences in the determinants of life satisfaction over the life course. Advances in Life Course Research, 18(2), 115-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2013.01.001
31. Martínez Vasallo, H. (2015). La familia: una visión interdisciplinaria. Revista Médica Electrónica, 37(5), 523- 534.
32. Mat, S.C., Maat, S.M., & Mohd, N. (2015). Identifying Factors that Affecting the Entrepreneurial Intention.
33. McCullough, M.E., Emmons, R.A., & Tsang, J.A. (2002). The grateful disposition: A conceptual and empirical topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 112-127. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.82.1.112
34. McKenzie, D., & Sansone, D. (2019). Predicting entrepreneurial success is hard: Evidence from a business plan competition in Nigeria. Journal of Development Economics, 141(July), 102369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2019.07.002
35. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D.G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
36. Nguyen, A.T., Do, T.H.H., Vu, T.B.T., Dang, K.A., & Nguyen, H.L. (2019). Factors affecting entrepreneurial intentions among youths in Vietnam. Children and Youth Services Review, 99(January), 186-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.01.039
37. Oliva Gómez, E., & Villa Guardiola, V. J. (2014). Hacia un concepto interdisciplinario de la familia en la globalización.
38. Justicia juris, 10(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.15665/rj.v10i1.295
39. Padovez-Cualheta, L., Borges, C., Camargo, A., & Tavares, L. (2019). An entrepreneurial career impacts on job and family satisfaction. RAUSP Management Journal, 54(2), 125-140. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-09-2018- 0081
40. Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences. En M. Petticrew & H. Roberts (Eds.), Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754887
41. Rachmania, I.N., Rakhmaniar, M., & Setyaningsih, S. (2012). Influencing Factors of Entrepreneurial Development in Indonesia. Procedia Economics and Finance, 4(1), 234-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2212- 5671(12)00338-3
42. Salvatore, N., Teresa, M., & Sastre, M. (2001). Appraisal of life: “area” versus “dimension” conceptualizations. Social Indicators Research, 53(1), 229-255. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007160616388
43. Santos, C.C., Teston, S.F., Zawadzki, P., Lizote, S.A., & Machado, H.P.V. (2020). Individual absorptive capacity and entrepreneurial intention in successors of rural properties. Revista de Administracao Mackenzie, 21(3). https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-6971/ERAMR200045
44. Sesen, H., & Ekemen, M.A. (2020). Data on personal and contextual factors of university students on their entrepreneurial intentions in some Turkish universities. Data in Brief, 28(1), 105086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2019.105086
45. Silva, W.A.C., De Freitas Fonseca, R., & De Oliveira Santos, A. (2016). Microbusiness development and quality of life of microentrepreneurs’s families. Revista de Administracao Mackenzie, 17(4), 176-200. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-69712016/administracao.v17n4p176-200
46. Staniewski, M.W., & Awruk, K. (2019). Entrepreneurial success and achievement motivation – A preliminary report on a validation study of the questionnaire of entrepreneurial success. Journal of Business Research, 101(March), 433-440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.073
47. Terán, E., & Guerrero, A. (2020). Teorías de emprendimiento: revisión crítica de la literatura y sugerencias para futuras investigaciones. Revistaespacios,41(7) 7.
48. http://www.revistaespacios.com/a20v41n07/20410707.html
49. To, C.K.M., Guaita Martínez, J.M., Orero-Blat, M., & Chau, K.P. (2020). Predicting motivational outcomes in social entrepreneurship: Roles of entrepreneurial self-efficacy and situational fit. Journal of Business Research, 121(August), 209-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.022
50. Van Praag, B.M.S., Frijters, P., & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2003). The anatomy of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 51(1), 29-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(02)00140-3
51. Xu, F., Kellermanns, F.W., Jin, L., & Xi, J. (2020). Family support as social exchange in entrepreneurship: Its moderating impact on entrepreneurial stressors-well-being relationships. Journal of Business Research, 120(February), 59-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.07.033