MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403071710 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17100447

Behavioral and Psychological Determinants of Cryptocurrency Investment: Expanding UTAUT with Perceived Enjoyment and Risk Factors

2024· article· en· W4403071710 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eugene Bland, Chuleeporn Changchit, Robert Cutshall, Long Pham

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptocurrencyRisk perceptionInvestment (military)PsychologySocial psychologyEconomicsPerceptionComputer securityComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With their potential for high returns and expanding role in the financial landscape, cryptocurrency investments have garnered the attention of the financial press and investors. Applying an integrated research model based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), this study investigates the factors influencing individual investors’ attitudes toward cryptocurrency investments and their intention to continue investing. The model incorporates constructs such as performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, perceived risk, perceived privacy, technology competency, perceived enjoyment, and prior experience. Data from 506 cryptocurrency investors located in the United States were collected through a 50-item questionnaire. The findings indicate that performance expectancy and perceived enjoyment positively impact attitudes toward cryptocurrency investments, which, in turn, influence the intention to continue investing. Perceived privacy positively affects performance expectancy, while technology competency enhances effort expectancy. These results offer valuable insights for policymakers and cryptocurrency exchanges to foster sustainable growth in the cryptocurrency market. Despite its contributions, the study acknowledges limitations, including a focus on current investors in the US and the exclusion of factors such as optimism and innovativeness. Future research should explore these aspects across different populations and regions to gain a more comprehensive understanding of cryptocurrency investment behavior.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207