Fᴀᴄᴛᴏʀs Aғғᴇᴄᴛɪɴɢ Bᴇʜᴀᴠɪᴏᴜʀᴀʟ Iɴᴛᴇɴᴛɪᴏɴ Oғ Nᴇᴡ

Iɴᴠᴇsᴛᴏʀs Iɴ Bɪᴛᴄᴏɪɴ Iɴᴠᴇsᴛᴍᴇɴᴛ

Wong Jun Wei, Woon Wei Yaw, Teh Jing Feng, Dr. Lim Siew Mooi

Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, Tunku Abdul Rahman

University College, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

wongjw-wm20@student.tarc.edu.my,woonwy-wm18@student.tarc.edu.my

,tehjf-wm18@student.tarc.edu.my, siewmooi@tarc.edu.my

Aʙsᴛʀᴀᴄᴛ

Background: Among the investment market, cryptocurrency is one of the trends that might carry a
lot of weights in future global financial markets. Bitcoin is the earliest ancestor of cryptocurrency.
Bitcoin applied a new technology which is not acceptable by reality in recent years which is
decentralised and blockchain technology. Bitcoin investment has a great magnitude and the price is
high which is not affordable by most of the people. The aim of this study is to investigate the factors
that affect behavioural intention of new investors in Bitcoin investment.

Methods: An online survey questionnaire was conducted from 11st August of 2022 until 24th August
of 2022. A total of 70 respondents have submitted the questionnaire for data collection purposes. For
further information, this study has also adopted data and result from another research (Echchabi, A.,
Omar, M.M.S. and Ayedh, A.M., 2021).

Results: The intention of new investors in Bitcoin investment are neutral, there are no majority of
respondents like to or refuse to invest in Bitcoin. 81.15% of respondents observe Bitcoin value less
than 3 times a week. Majority of respondents , 37.14% strongly agree that they need to do more
research before investing in Bitcoin. Almost half of respondents out of 70 were neutral by thinking that
Bitcoin investment is easy to learn, meanwhile 22.9% of them agree that they are willing to learn.
Furthermore, 48.6% of respondents have no idea whether it is worth it to hold Bitcoin. However, 31
respondents out of 70 having a positive opinion that Bitcoin will become more valuable in the future.

Conclusion: This study established a relationship of 4 independent variables which are trust,
profitability, perceived ease of use and perceived risk with the intention of new investors in Bitcoin.
Based on the hypothesis testing, trust, profitability and perceived ease of use has no significant
positive influence on the intention meanwhile perceived risk does. Thus, most of the alternative
hypotheses are accepted except for perceived risk . This shows that the majority of the independent
variables do not affect the intention of the new investors to enrol in Bitcoin investment. This research
brings an important contribution to the literature about Bitcoin investment.

Kᴇʏᴡᴏʀᴅs
Bitcoin, New Investor, Intention, Cryptocurrency
1.0 Iɴᴛʀᴏᴅᴜᴄᴛɪᴏɴ
Bitcoin was first created during the 2008 Great Recession. (A. Bitcoin #) A white paper titled Bitcoin: A
Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System was posted to a cryptography mailing list. As a mystery, the author
of the paper whose name is “Satoshi Nakamoto” has never divulged any of the personal information and
the identity has never been confirmed also. In 2009, Satoshi Nakamoto released the Bitcoin as open
source software and he mined the starting block of the blockchain which is Genesis Block, the first
transaction happens in about one week later.

The main purpose of Bitcoin is to address the trust required in handling citizens’ cash and resolve the
government centralised control of money. However, Bitcoin was not accepted by some of the countries in
the past, this is due to the reason that most of the major transactions are occurring in black markets. The
largest of these was Silk Road, which was widely known by most of the investors or miners at that time.
To confront and influence the usage of the black market, People’s Bank of China launched a few
regulations which issued a blanket ban on the use of Bitcoin and carried out a crackdown on major
cryptocurrency miners (Xu & Chen, 2012).

From slow value added in 2008 to the 2021 price peak, Bitcoin has become the world's most popular and
fascinating cryptocurrency nowadays. Some of the advocates firmly believe that bitcoin will replace
physical cash in the future. Today, the price of bitcoin has fallen from the price peak of around 64800
USD to around 22,800 USD. Nonetheless, investors of bitcoin are optimistic about the bitcoin investment
although it’s not perfect.

1.1 Problem Statement

1.1.1 What is the problem
Investment has become a hot topic in teenagers and youth in recent years. There are many content
creators and influencers appearing on the internet, especially YouTube,sharing their experience on
investment and how much they earn during the MCO (Movement Control Order). Besides that, there are
many advertisements about the trading app also in social media which brainwash the netizens invisibly.
Netizens who wish to get rich will do a lot of research about investment. Hence, there would be many
tutorials that teach people how to invest in the internet. Digital currency is one of the most famous
investments because it has the potential to break the current financial order or democratise finance.
Bitcoin is the most famous digital currency among them.

1.1.2 Who has the problem

Since the value of bitcoin increased rapidly in recent years, it attracted investor interest in buying it.
Professional investors and many people invested in it and earned a lot of money, attracting the attention of
the public especially the teenagers and youth. Undeniable that investing is the fastest way to get rich but it
is not the safest way. But this could not stop the teenagers and youth involved in investment. Most of the
youngsters around the world learn how to invest from the internet.

Without considering it carefully before investing, many investors made a bad decision and brought a lot
of impacts. Most of the impacts are reliable to the amount of money they invested. For those teenagers
and youth investing with rational thinking would not put all one’s eggs in one basket. There would not be
a huge issue for this kind of person. But for the greedy and reckless person, investing in such a way may
cause problems that they could not handle and overcome.

1.1.3 What does the problem impact

The first impact that might occur is they are indebted. Some of them might misbelieve others' opinion or
suggestion in investment and cause them to raise money by borrowing, scamming or any other way that
could make money just to invest on it. If the investment fails, the person will shuffle in a depressed
condition and could not cheer up anymore because he has to repay debt throughout his life. Even Though
if the investment is successful, he will do the same thing again in the future until he fails once. This
resulted in bankruptcy. Furthermore, their daily emotion and mood would be affected by the market
condition. Market is the only thing inside their eyes, they will be happy and cheerful if the market rises
but they will be sad or even irritable if the market drops.

1.2 Research Objectives

1. To investigate the trust of bitcoin investment affects the new investors in bitcoin investment.
2. To find out the profitability in bitcoin investment affects the new investors.
3. To analyse the perceived risk in bitcoin investment affects the new investors.
4. To identify the perceived ease of use in bitcoin investment affects the new investors.

1.3 Research Questions

1. What are the factors affecting trust of new investors in bitcoin investment
2. Does the profitability in bitcoin investment affect the new investors ?
3. What are the factors affecting the perceived risk of new investors in bitcoin investment?
4. Does the perceived ease of use affect the new investors in bitcoin investment?

1.4 Research Hypotheses

H1. Trust has a significant positive influence on new investors to invest in bitcoin.
HA1. Trust has no significant positive influence on new investors to invest in bitcoin.

H2. Profitability has a positive impact on new investors to invest in bitcoin.

HA2. Profitability has no positive impact on new investors to invest in bitcoin.

H3. Perceived risk has a significant impact on new investors to invest in bitcoin.
HA3. Perceived risk has no significant impact on new investors to invest in bitcoin.

H4. Ease of use has a positive influence on new investors to invest in bitcoin.
HA4. Ease of use has no positive influence on new investors to invest in bitcoin.
 Figure1: Framework of the factors affecting new investors in bitcoin investment

1.5 Assumption
1.5.1. Inclusion criteria
1. As a Investor Involved In Investment have at least 1 time invest Cryptocurrency.
2. All the Investors Involved In Cryptocurrency Investment at least once a month.
3. All the Investors have at least Involved In Cryptocurrency Investment including Bitcoin, Ethereum,
XRP

2.0 Lɪᴛᴇʀᴀᴛᴜʀᴇ Rᴇᴠɪᴇᴡ

2.1 Recent research on the behavioural intention of
2.1.1 Trust
An Important construct is Cryptocurrency acceptance has been suggested as Trust. Human trust that
Bitcoin can be worth more in the future (Baldwin, J, 2018) which helps Cryptocurrency investors to cash
out for more than they paid. Bitcoin secure exchange rate, minimises the uncertainty of human behaviours
in certain situations in a cooperative, community-driven manner without the need for a trusted third party(
Pranav Nerurkar, 2009-2020)

Additionally, The cryptocurrency' value depends on supply and demand, just like anything else that
people have no interest in. If supply increases faster than demand, the price will go down. The volume of
demand is based on trust that humans decide involved in investment Cryptocurrency.(Ilk N, Shang
G,2021) Cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin are breakthrough financial technologies . well management of
blockchain systems certain maintaining stability of cryptocurrency markets and reliability to humans.

Furthermore, Trust is frequently incorporated into the technology adoption literature in various contexts
where design choices impact upon trust on future blockchain-based technologies(Craggs B, 2019)
Blockchain provides an innovative approach to store message, establishing trust in an open environment.
Many consider blockchain as a technology breakthrough for cryptocurrency.
2.1.2 Profitability
The district of investment behaviour is widely studied in distinct regions,that central on applying different
adoption models and on different kinds of assets. For example, the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) has
been used by Pascual-Ezama et al. (2014) to inquire about the investors’ behaviour in the Spanish stock
market. This research covered a specimen of 127 individual investors and applied the SEM method. The
findings divulge that the attitude, beliefs, and subjective norms have a significant positive influence on the
investment behaviour.

On the other hand, one of the significant norms for investment selection is profitability (Stubelj, 2014).
This is due to the reason that investors are more inclined to invest in assets that are more considered to be
profitable with high return prospects. Based on the research of (Rogers, 2003). Compared with the
common investment assets, the profitability of investment in bitcoin is considered as more relative
profitability, such as bonds, stocks, and commodities. Furthermore, the oblique profitability is also
considered as the benefit that investors can gain through diversification.

2.1.3 Perceived ease of use

The perceived ease of use means the degree of individual confidence to use a particular technology with
less effort (Davis, 1989). It is found that familiarity and sufficient experience to use these technologies
may boost self-efficacy of the individual and reduce the anxiety associated with the early application of
modern technologies (Abu-Shanab & Haider, 2015; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). There are studies that
validated the positive relationship between the perceived ease of use and the influence of the intention in
different research contexts (Chen, Lijun & Aklikokou, Apetogbo, 2019). According to Miau and Yang
(2018), Bitcoin networks include a variety of computing devices (i.e., laptops, smart devices and tablets)
that can be easily accessible and used. Investment to bitcoin can be conducted using these computing
devices easily which caused the new investor to enrol in bitcoin investment. This is because the procedure
of Bitcoin investment is simple and free of efforts to invest.

2.1.4 Perceived risk

This empirical study focuses on how professional and non-professional investors perceive and respond to
investment risk. Professional investors placed more confidence in low risk assets but perceive greater risk
in high risk investment products than non-professional investors (Divesh S. Sharma, 2016) Something
that influences output can be shown into perceived risks. expected return increases one's interest in
investing in the capital market, perceived risk reduces one's interest in investing in the capital market
(Kurniawan, P. I, 2021)

2.2 Hypothesis Based Literature

2.2.1 Trust and intention
Intention refers to the degree that the individual will be using the technology. Blockchain provides an
innovative approach to store messages, establishing trust in an open environment. Many consider
blockchain as a technology breakthrough for cryptocurrency.(Craggs B, 2019) When investing bitcoin,
 first prove itself to the user in order that the trust will be established. It was found that there is a negative
relationship between trust and intention to invest bitcoin.

2.2.2 Profitability and intention

Profitability has a major impact on intention. This is due to the reason that investors are more inclined to
invest in assets that are more considered to be profitable with high return prospects. Based on the research
of (Rogers, 2003). Compared with the common investment assets, the profitability of investment in
bitcoin is considered as more relative profitability. Profitability has a significant positive influence on
investment behaviour.

2.2.3 Perceived ease of use and intention

The perceived ease of use consult to a degree of a person that believes in invest bitcoin and can
affect the investor's intention. There has been evidence that the perceived ease of use will establish a
better intention towards the investment (Davis, 1989) Perceived ease of use negatively influences
intention to use self- driving cars.

2.2.4 Perceived risk and intention

The most concern is the perceived risk that the majority of the new investor is be anxious
about the safety risk due to the investment failure and it is the most frequent reason they are not willingly
to investment (Kurniawan, P. I, 2021) Perceived risk had direct positive impact on both investment
performance and intentions (Trang, P. T. M., & Tho, N. H, 2017)

3.0 Rᴇsᴇᴀʀᴄʜ Mᴇᴛʜᴏᴅᴏʟᴏɢʏ

In this research, we have created and applied a questionnaire by using Google form as a quantitative
research approach to investigate the factor affecting the behavioural intention of new investors in bitcoin
investment. The study population is mainly those people who are interested in bitcoin investment and
those who are totally new to cryptocurrency investment. The questionnaire was distributed and created in
the English Language. In order to determine the respondents’ perception, Likert scale was used (1 =
strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree).

For more referencing purposes, we have also included the document and records from other journals,
(Echchabi, A., Omar, M.M.S. and Ayedh, A.M., 2021). The major age groups that participated in their
study are 20-30 years old as much as 59.9% out of 180 participants. This age group can be considered as
new investors as well so it can be referred to. Further details such as reliability and validity measures will
be defined in section 3.2.

3.1 Research Instrument / Data Collection

No. Items Type Option

1. Gender Nominal Male / Female

2. Age Ordinal <17 / 18-22 / 23-27 / >27

3. What is your monthly income level? ( pocket money, Ordinal (RM) 0 -500 / 501 - 1000 /
salary & wages etc ) 1001 - 1500 / >1500

4. How often do you observe Bitcoin value in the market? Ordinal (Per week) 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5
Table 1

Measure Item Description Adopted from

Simple Summary 1. What is the main reason for you to buy bitcoin ? ( Can Bitcoin questionnaire.
choose more than 1 ) Drag'n Survey. (n.d.)

Trust 1. Do you trust the technology of bitcoin in the long term? ( Bitcoin questionnaire.
block chain & decentralize etc ) Drag'n Survey. (n.d.)

2. I will try investing because a lot of people are talking about Chua, Eunice & Rustico, Ed
it. Mark. (2018)

3. My trust in bitcoin will be based on the reliability of the Craggs B, (2019)

future blockchain-based technologies

4. I feel confident that currency better than trust-less transfer Blundell-Wignall A(2014)
technology

Profitability 1. I want to earn higher returns in bitcoin investment. Chua, Eunice & Rustico, Ed
Mark. (2018)

2. Is it worth it to hold bitcoin? Kim, S. T. (2022)

3. I would find bitcoin more value in the future DeVries, P. D. (2016)

4. I think bitcoin have highest returns Emikönel, M. (2022)

Perceived ease of use 1. I will hire a financial adviser to manage my bitcoin Chua, Eunice & Rustico, Ed
investment. Mark. (2018)

2. I want to learn about this type of investment because it is Chua, Eunice & Rustico, Ed
easy to do so Mark. (2018)

3. I think a bitcoin investment would be easy to involved DeMartino, I. (2018)

4. I would find bitcoin investment with low risk Taulli, T. (2022)

Perceived Risk 1. Investing in bitcoin is within my control. Schaupp, L. C. και Festa, M.

(2018)

2. I have the resources, knowledge and ability to invest in Schaupp, L. C. και Festa, M.
bitcoin. (2018)
 3. I still need to research more before I invest. Chua, Eunice & Rustico, Ed
Mark. (2018)

4. A blockchain in bitcoin may not enough to safe Murko A （2019)

Intention 1. I would like to invest Bitcoin investment in the future McGinnis, J. O. (2020)

2. I try to accept payment as currency in future Raskin, M., & Yermack, D.

(2018)

3. I would like to invest bitcoin now McGinnis, J. O. (2020)

4. I predict I will try to use bitcoin in the future. Frisby, D. (2014)

Table 2

3.2 Validity and Reliability Consideration

Due to the characteristics of our questionnaire, we expected there is a possible chance that some
participant will be misunderstood by some of our questions and respond in such a way that it doesn’t
align with our meaning. To minimise this kind of thing, we have executed smaller testing on 15
respondents before actual data collection. The goal of executing the smaller testing study is to evaluate the
reliability and our respondents able to understand our questionnaire. The questionnaire is assigned to
bachelor students in Tunku Abdul Rahman University College . The inclusion of the standard to be taken
for our respondents are those who study strictly related to programming and investment.

We also take the structure of our questionnaire into consideration as the planning might affect the
behaviour of respondents when they respond to the question and could potentially confuse them, to avoid
this happening, we manage the productivity gathering question at the start of the survey. Cronbach’s
Alpha testing is used to identify the reliability of our questionnaire, data is collected using Google Form,
export and important into PSPP as txt tab delimited format, from there we run Cronbach’s Alpha test and
find out the score is 0.70 which is in acceptable range.

In addition, data collection from other journals was applied in this study and the result was also adopted
as a reference (Echchabi, A., Omar, M.M.S. and Ayedh, A.M., 2021). They applied convergent validity
which means items measuring a given construct have to share a high proportion of common variance. A
few methods to assess this validity such as average variance extracted (AVE), Cronbach’s alpha (Hair et
al., 2010) and also factor loadings. Table below shows the outcome after applying the convergent validity.
Cronbach’s alpha greater or equal to 0.6 is acceptable meanwhile 0.5 or above would be acceptable for
level of AVE and factor loadings. We just need to focus on Trust, Profitability, Perceived ease of use
because it sticks to the objective of current study. Their Cronbach’s alpha values are between 0.939 and
0.953 while AVE values between 0.779 and 0.811. Hence, requirements for convergent validity are
fulfilled which means convergent validity is achieved.

3.3 Sampling
The questionnaire is mainly focused on adults who are above 18 years old. Not at all, the questionnaire
was carried out on 11 August of 2022 until 24 August of 2022 and during the period we fortunately
collected a total of 70 respondents who participated in the questionnaire through the Google form. All of
the 70 respondents will be used in our data analysis since some of the respondents are not fulfilling our
requirement.

3.4 Analysis
The data was analysed by applying the reliability test, factor analysis, normality analysis, descriptive
analysis.We are using Cronbach's alpha to assess the reliability and validity with PSPP. As shown in the
table below, The items that are investigated are six constructs and 21 items that are shown to accept
values for Cronbach’s alpha which is ranging from 0.76 which is an acceptable value. Besides that, The
items about Reliability Test of independent variables such as Trust, Profitability, Perceived ease of use,
Perceived Risk that are indicate accept values for Cronbach’s alpha which is scope from 0.61 to 0.79.

4.0 Rᴇsᴜʟᴛs Aɴᴅ Dɪsᴄᴜssɪᴏɴs

4.1 Cronbach’s Alpha
Cronbach’s Alpha reliability test was conducted to test for all 25 questions in our questionnaire with a
total of 70 of respondents. The overview reliability test value of Cronbach’s Alpha is 0.74 as shown in
Figure 2.
 Figure 2: Overview Reliability Test

Besides from the overview reliability test, we also carried out and obtained the Cronbach’s Alpha value
for each of the variables. As shown in Figure 3, the reliability test value of trust is 0.79, and Figure 4
shows that the reliability test of profitability is 0.72. Not at all, the reliability test value of perceived ease
of use was shown in Figure 5 is 0.73, and lastly the Figure 6 shows that reliability test of perceived risk is
0.61.

Figure 3: Reliability Test of Trust Figure 4: Reliability Test of Profitability

Figure 5: Reliability Test of Perceived ease of use Figure 6: Reliability Test of Perceived Risk
4.2 Descriptive Analysis
Table 3.1

Table 3.2

Table 3.3

Table 3.4

Table 3.5
Table 3.6

Table 3.7

Table 3.8

Table 3.9

Table 3.10
Table 3.1 - Table 3.3 show all valid responses from our selected respondents and the collected data are
classified in different lines on the group of choice given in each demographic question whereas.
Table 3.5 - Table 3.6 are the cross tabulations that summarise the relationship between different
variables of classify data.
Table 3.7 - Table 3.10 show all respondents and the collected data are classified in different rows based on
strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strong agree given in each demographic questions.
The data were collected from 11 August of 2022 to 24 August of 2022 and a total of 70 respondents have
returned the questionnaire

Table 3.1 shows the gender of the respondents where 60% were male and 40% were female as we have
collected 70 pieces of data from 42 male respondents and 28 female respondents respectively. Referring
to Table 3.2, we can observe that most of the respondents are aged between 18-22 years old, followed by
23-27 years old, below 17 years old and 28 and above years old. Table 3.3 shows the monthly income of
the selected respondents while 33 respondents (47.1%) have a monthly income of RM0-RM500, 16
respondents (22.9%) have RM501-RM1000 and 14 respondents (20%) have RM1501 and above and 7
respondents (10%) have RM1000-RM1500 as their monthly income. According to Table 3.5, male
respondents will mostly observe bitcoin some of the time whereas only a small number of respondents, 28
out of 69 respondents, always attempt to observe bitcoin. In Table 3.11, most of the male
respondents will need more research before invest whereas the majority of the female respondents
sometimes there will be no fixed position. Table 3.6 - Table 3.10 shows the new investor behaviour
situation such as willingness to learn investment because it is easy to do so. From table 3.7, 34
respondents (48.6%) are neutral, willing to learn investment because it is easy to do so. 5 respondents
(7.1%) will never learn investment because it is hard to do so and 12 respondents (17.1%) disagree with
learning this type of investment because it is easy to do so. On the other hand, 16 respondents (22.9%)
agree it is easy to do so with willingness to learn this type of investment and 3 respondents (4.3%)
strongly agree with willingness to learn this type of investment because it is easy to do so. Table 3.8
shows that among 70 respondents, 3 respondents (4.3%) strongly disagree with is it worth to hold bitcoin,
10 respondents (14.3%) disagree with is it worth to hold bitcoin, 34 respondents (48.6%) neutral with is it
worth to hold bitcoin, 16 respondents (22.9%) agree with is it worth to hold bitcoin and 7 respondents
(10%) with is it worth to hold bitcoin. Table 3.9 shows that 8 respondents (11.4%) strongly disagree with
finding more value of bitcoin in future, 11 respondents (15.7%) disagree with finding more value of
bitcoin in future, 24 respondents (34.3%) neutral with finding more value of bitcoin in future, 25
respondents (35.7%) agree with is finding more value of bitcoin in future and 6 respondents (8.6%) with
finding more value of bitcoin in future. Table 3.10 shows that 8 respondents (11.4%) strongly disagree to
think bitcoin have highest returns, 7 respondents (10%) disagree to think bitcoin have highest returns, 39
respondents (55.7%) neutral to think bitcoin have highest returns, 15 respondents (21.4%) agree to think
bitcoin have highest returns and 1 respondents (1.4%) strongly agree to think bitcoin have highest returns
4.3 Factor Analysis

Table 4 : KMO and Barlett’s Test

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Test is a measure of how suited the data is for Factor Analysis. KMO
values less than 0.6 indicate the sampling is not adequate and that remedial action should be taken. shows
that our sampling is adequate and the
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity of significant value less than 0.001 (> 0.05) demonstrates that conveyance on
the factor analysis would be good for our data.

Figure 7 : Scree plot of Eigenvalue

 Table 5 : Total Variance Explained

For this research, we will be using the factor analysis skill as this analysing method. On table 5, it shows
that the result of computing on a twenty item measure, four separate variance were extracted, which is the
same as the number of factors that this research proposed. The 6 extracted
variance explains nearly 70.4% of the variability in the original 20 variables, with a 29.6% of information
loss. The first extracted variance has contributed 22.8% of loadings cumulative, the second extracted
variance has contributed 17.2% of loadings cumulative, the third extracted variance has contributed 9.4%
of loadings cumulative, while the fourth extracted variance has contributed 7.8% of loadings cumulative.

4.4 Normality Test

By referring the Table 6 for the descriptives, the skewness of Total Intention Behavioural is -0.593 with a
standard error 0.287 describe a negative skewness, where the peak of the graph slope to be on the right,
and the data will be skewed to the left. That means major respondent intent to behavioural intention of
bitcoin investment. Besides that, the value for kurtosis is -0.165 and with a standard error of 0.566 which
shows that the shape of the graph tends to be on the right, and the data will be kurtosis to the left.
According to the P-P plot at the Diagram 4, It is acceptable because most of the points close the gap from
the line of y=x which points are connected and become a curve. According to the Q-Q plot at Diagram 3,
the deviation ratio of the leftmost point and rightmost point from the straight line is higher and thus it
indicates that the distribution is slightly negatively skewed and negatively kurtosis.
Table 6: Tests of Normality

Diagram 1: Histogram
Diagram 2: Normal P-P Plot of Total Intention Behavioural

Diagram 3: Normal Q-Q Plot of Total Intention Behavioural

Diagram 4: Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot of Total Intention Behavioural

Table 7: Descriptives
4.5 Hypothesis Testing
HA1. Trust has no significant positive influence on new investors to invest in bitcoin.

Figure 8: One-Way Anova Result for Trust and Intention

Based on the figure 8, the significant value of the trust and intention is 0.629 which is more than 0.05,
thereby trust has no significant relationship with the intention to invest.
HA2. Profitability has no positive impact on new investors to invest in bitcoin.

Figure 9: One-Way Anova Result for Profitability and Intention

Based on the One-Way Anova result for profitability and intention show that the Significant value is more
than 0.05 which is 0.979. Thus, profitability has no positive impact on new investors to invest in Bitcoin.

HA3. Perceived risk has a significant impact on new investors to invest in bitcoin.

Figure 10: One-Way Anova Result for Perceived Risk and Intention

Based on the Figure 10 above, perceived risk and intention has a positive significant relationship. This is
due to the significant value for both variables being 0.039 which is lesser than 0.05.

HA4. Ease of use has no positive influence on new investors to invest in bitcoin.

Figure 11: One-Way Anova Result for Perceived Ease of use and Intention

Significant value of One-Way Anova for perceived ease of use and intention is 0.305 which means that
the ease of use has no positive influence on new investors to invest in Bitcoin investment.
5.0 Cᴏɴᴄʟᴜsɪᴏɴs
The current study plans to find out the factors influencing intention of new investors in Bitcoin
investment. Relationship among four factors with the intention of a new Bitcoin investor. For Example,
trust, profitability, perceived ease of use, perceived risk were inspected using technology acceptance
models. By referring to the Hypothesis Testing, our results showed that trust, profitability, perceived ease
of use, have no significant relationship with the intention to invest. On the other hand, perceived risk will
be suggested to accept. We can prove that the relationship between perceived risk is positive with the
intention of the new investor.

6.0 Rᴇᴄᴏᴍᴍᴇɴᴅᴀᴛɪᴏɴs Fᴏʀ Fᴜʀᴛʜᴇʀ Rᴇsᴇᴀʀᴄʜ Wᴏʀᴋ

We are suggested to increase the geographical location of the respondents. Bitcoin and other crypto
currencies are actually a worldwide investment. Therefore, it is good for the research if new investors
from other countries are also involved in this study. Investment knowledge, their intention and their
behaviours are different due to environmental influences such as culture and religion. Latest currency of
their country might affect the new investors too.

Furthermore, more data collection methods can be used to increase the neutrality and credibility of the
study. If more factors can be included in the future study. With the increase of the factors, researchers and
the public can well understand the intention of new investors in Bitcoin investment.

7.0 Aᴄᴋɴᴏᴡʟᴇᴅɢᴇᴍᴇɴᴛs
The researchers gratefully acknowledge Dr. Lim Siew Mooi (Tutor) who has provided many guidelines
and materials for us to follow and produce the research paper. Checking of paper and opinions are given
to us in the practical class, meanwhile general knowledge about research and guidelines are provided in
lecturer class throughout the semester.In addition, the researchers would like to acknowledge respondents
who answered the questionnaire and all other people who provided help in this Research Method
assignment such as classmates and seniors. Without their help, we cannot process this assignment as
smoothly as we did. Moreover, special thanks go to the Faculty of Computing and Information
Technology (FOCS) of Tunku Abdul Rahman University College (TARUC) for creating a research
opportunity for us. Finally, thanks to all the researchers in this paper, Teh Jing Feng, Woon Wei Yaw,
Wong Jun Wei for completing the assignment and helping each other.

8.0 Rᴇғᴇʀᴇɴᴄᴇs
Xu, X.E.,Chen, T. (2012). The Effect of Monetary Policy on Real Estate Price Growth in China. Pacific-Basin
Finance Journal, 20(1), 62-77.
Baldwin, J. (2018), In digital we trust: Bitcoin discourse, digital currencies, and decentralized network fetishism.
Palgrave Commun 4, 14

Pranav Nerurkar, Dhiren Patel, Yann Busnel, Romaric Ludinard, Saru Kumari, Muhammad Khurram Khan,
(2009-2020), Empirical Analysis of Bitcoin Network

Pascual-Ezama, D., Scandroglio, B. and De Liano, B.G. (2014) “Can we predict individual investors’ behaviour in
stock markets? A psychological approach’, Universitas Psychologica, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp.25-35.

Stubelj, I. (2014) ‘Investment and profits: Causality analysis in selected EU countries’, Managing Global
Transitions, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.395-413

Ilk N, Shang G, Fan S, 2021, et al. Stability of Transaction Fees in Bitcoin: A Supply and Demand Perspective[J].
MIS Quarterly,, 45(2

Craggs B, Rashid A. 2019, Trust beyond computation alone: Human aspects of trust in blockchain
technologies[C]//2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in
Society (ICSE-SEIS). IEEE,: 21-30.

Divesh S. Sharma, 2006, Effects of professional and non-professional investors’ perceptions of board effectiveness
on their judgments: An experimental study, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Volume 25, Issue 1, Pages
91-115

Kurniawan, P. I. (2021). Effect of expected return, self efficacy, and perceived risk on investment intention: an
empirical study on accounting master degree in Udayana University, Bali.

Trang, P. T. M., & Tho, N. H. (2017). Perceived risk, investment performance and intentions in emerging stock
markets. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 7(1), 269-278.

Nadeem, Muhammad Athar & Liu, Zhiying & Pitafi, Hameed & Younis, Amna & Xu, Yi. (2021). Investigating the
Adoption Factors of Cryptocurrencies—A Case of Bitcoin: Empirical Evidence From China. SAGE Open.
10.1177/2158244021998704.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.
MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Abu-Shanab, E. and Haider, S., 2015. Major factors influencing the adoption of m-government in Jordan. Electronic
Government, an International Journal, 11(4), pp.223-240.

Venkatesh, V. and Bala, H., 2008. Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision
sciences, 39(2), pp.273-315.

Chen, Lijun & Aklikokou, Apetogbo. (2019). Determinants of E-government Adoption: Testing the Mediating
Effects of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use. International Journal of Public Administration. 43. 1-16.
10.1080/01900692.2019.1660989.

Miau, S. and Yang, J.M., 2018. Bibliometrics-based evaluation of the Blockchain research trend: 2008–March 2017.
Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 30(9), pp.1029-1045.
Echchabi, A., Omar, M.M.S. and Ayedh, A.M., 2021. Factors influencing Bitcoin investment intention: the case of
Oman. International Journal of Internet Technology and Secured Transactions, 11(1), pp.1-15.

Schaupp, L. C. και Festa, M. (2018) ‘Cryptocurrency Adoption and the Road to Regulation’, στο Proceedings of the
19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age. New York,
NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery (dg.o ’18). doi: 10.1145/3209281.3209336.

Chua, Eunice & Rustico, Ed Mark. (2018). ACCEPTABILITY OF INVESTING IN CRYPTOCURRENCIES

Blundell-Wignall A. 2014, The Bitcoin question: Currency versus trust-less transfer technology[J].

Murko A, Vrhovec S L R. 2019, Bitcoin adoption: Scams and anonymity may not matter but trust into Bitcoin
security does[C]//Proceedings of the Third Central European Cybersecurity Conference.: 1-6.

McGinnis, J. O. (2020). Bitcoin's Nature and Its Future. Harv. JL & Pub. Pol'y, 43, 59.

Frisby, D. (2014). Bitcoin: the future of money?. Unbound Publishing.

Raskin, M., & Yermack, D. (2018). Digital currencies, decentralized ledgers and the future of central banking. In
Research handbook on central banking (pp. 474-486). Edward Elgar Publishing.

DeMartino I, 2018, The Bitcoin Guidebook: How to Obtain, Invest, and Spend the World's First Decentralized
Cryptocurrency[M]. Simon and Schuster.

Taulli T. 2022, Crypto[M]//The Personal Finance Guide for Tech Professionals. Apress, Berkeley, CA,: 115-137.

Kim, S. T. (2022). Is it worth to hold bitcoin?. Finance Research Letters, 44, 102090.

DeVries, P. D. (2016). An analysis of cryptocurrency, bitcoin, and the future. International Journal of Business
Management and Commerce, 1(2), 1-9.

Emikönel, M. (2022). Volatility and the Day of the Week Effect on Bitcoin Returns. Journal of Emerging Economies
and Policy.

A. Bitcoin, S.N. (2008). A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. 2. Bitcoin.--URL: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin. Pdf

Bitcoin questionnaire. Drag'n Survey. (n.d.). Retrieved August 13, 2022, from
https://form.dragnsurvey.com/survey/r/7197f625

9.0 Aᴘᴘᴇɴᴅɪx
Table A.1
Table A.2

Table A.3
Table A.4
Table A.5

Table A.6
Table A.7
Table A.8
Table A.9