Drivers of Blockchain Adoption in Accounting and Auditing Services: Leveraging Theory of Planned Behavior with Identity and Moral Norms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blockchain technology has become a game changer in sectors like accounting and auditing. Its usage is still restricted due to a lack of insight into what drives people to adopt it for financial services like accounting and auditing. This research delves into the factors that influence the adoption of blockchain systems in accounting and auditing services by utilizing an enhanced edition of the Theory of Planned Behavior. In this study, alongside the previously established elements like Attitude, subjective norm, and Perceived Behavioral Control, self-perception and personal moral values are included to reflect how identity and ethics impact decision-making processes. Data were gathered via an online survey (N = 751) conducted on the Prolific platform, and the hypotheses were tested using Structural Equation Modeling. The hypotheses were examined through the Structural Equation Modeling method. The findings indicate that each of the five predictors plays a significant role in influencing Behavioral Intention, with personal moral values being the influential factor followed by subjective norm and Perceived Behavioral Control. Attitude plays an important role in shaping adoption choices and showcases the complexity involved in such decisions. As such, it is crucial to take into account ethical factors when encouraging the use of blockchain technology. This study adds to the existing knowledge of the Theory of Planned Behavior framework, offering insights for companies aiming to boost the implementation of blockchain systems in professional settings. Future research avenues and real-world implications are explored with an emphasis placed on developing targeted strategies that align technological adoption with personal values and organizational objectives.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".