Vol. 10 No. 1 (2022): Business & Management Studies: An International Journal

Testing the structural validity of the model designed for perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, trust, and intention to use Bitcoin with process macro

Abdullah Oğrak
Assoc. Prof. Dr., Van Yüzüncü Yıl University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Business Administration, Van, Turkey

Published 2022-03-26


  • Bitcoin, Kullanım Kolaylığı, Fayda, Güven, Kullanım Niyeti, Process Macro
  • Bitcoin, Ease of Use, Usefulness, Trust, Intention to Use, Process Macro

How to Cite

Oğrak, A. (2022). Testing the structural validity of the model designed for perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, trust, and intention to use Bitcoin with process macro. Business &Amp; Management Studies: An International Journal, 10(1), 399–411. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v10i1.2029


The first cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, has recently received much attention from researchers. There are studies by researchers to contribute more to the Bitcoin literature. However, it is essential to support the Bitcoin literature with different studies. While testing the structural validity of an integrated model that extends the technology acceptance model with a trust structure, this study aims to explain users' intention to use Bitcoin based on their perception of Bitcoin as accessible and valuable and their trust in Bitcoin. Data were collected from 206 participants using an online survey for this aim. The structural validity of the model, which was tested with the macro process technique, was confirmed by statistical analysis. According to the statistical analysis results, the perceived ease of use of Bitcoin, perceived usefulness of Bitcoin, and trust in Bitcoin and the existing relationships between these factors are practical on the intention to use Bitcoin. However, it should be noted that users' intentions to use Bitcoin do not differ significantly in terms of gender, age-range/generation, education status, and monthly income. This study provides implications for both theory and practice and recommendations for future research.


Download data is not yet available.


  1. Aaker, D.A., Kumar, V. and Day, G.S., (2007), Marketing Research, 9. Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Danvers.
  2. Albayati, H., Kim, S. K.and Rho, J. J. (2020), “Accepting Financial Transactions Using Blockchain Technology and Cryptocurrency: A Customer Perspective Approach”, Technology in Society, 62, 101320.
  3. Aysan, A. F., Demirtaş, H. B. and Saraç, M. (2021), “The Ascent of Bitcoin: Bibliometric Analysis of Bitcoin Research”, Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 14(9), 427.
  4. Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y. and Phillips, L. W. (1991), “Assessing Construct Validity in Organizational Research”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 6(3), 421-458.
  5. Chong, A. Y. L., Ooi, K. B., Lin, B. and Tan, B. I. (2010), “Online Banking Adoption: An Empirical Analysis”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28(4), 267-287.
  6. Davis, F. D. (1985), “A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results”, Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  7. Davis, F. D. (1989), “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, And User Acceptance of Information Technology”, MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
  8. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P. and Warshaw, P. R. (1989), “User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models”, Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
  9. Davis, F. D. and Venkatesh, V. (1996), “A Critical Assessment of Potential Measurement Biases in the Technology Acceptance Model: Three Experiments”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(1), 19-45.
  10. Elsenpeter, C. R. and Velte, J. T. (2001), eBusiness: A Beginner's Guide, Osborne/McGraw-Hill, Network Professional's Library.
  11. Field, A. (2000), Discovering Statistics Using SPSS for Windows, London-Thousand Oaks-New Delhi: Sage Publications.
  12. Folkinshteyn, D. and Lennon, M. (2016), “Braving Bitcoin: A Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) Analysis”, Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 18(4), 220-249.
  13. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981). “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error”, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
  14. Gafar, A., Abenoh, N. A. B. and Ahmed, E. M. (2021), “Generations Y and X Perception Towards Bitcoin in Malaysia”, Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, 20(01), 2150007.
  15. Gu, J. C., Lee, S. C. and Suh, Y. H. (2009), “Determinants of Behavioural Intention to Mobile Banking”, Expert Systems with Applications, 36(9), 11605-11616.
  16. Gunawan, F. E. and Novendra, R. (2017), “An Analysis of Bitcoin Acceptance in Indonesia”, ComTech: Computer, Mathematics and Engineering Applications, 8(4), 241-247.
  17. Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. and Anderson, R. E. (2009), Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
  18. Hayes, A. F. (2018), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, New York; London: Guilford Publications.
  19. Huang, Y. C., Chang, L. L., Yu, C. P. and Chen, J. (2019), “Examining an Extended Technology Acceptance Model with Experience Construct on Hotel Consumers’ Adoption of Mobile Applications”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 28(8), 957-980.
  20. Kabak, A. and Çelik, Z. (2020), “Tüketicilerin Kripto Para Kullanım Niyeti İle İlişkili Faktörlerin Belirlenmesine Yönelik Uygulamalı Bir Araştırma”, 6th International GAP Social Sciences Congress, Şanlıurfa-Turkey, 239-252.
  21. Lee, M. C. (2009), “Factors Influencing the Adoption of Internet Banking: An Integration of TAM and TPB with Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit”, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 8(3), 130-141.
  22. Ma, J. and Orgun, M. A. (2006), “Trust Management and Trust Theory Revision”, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 36(3), 451-460.
  23. Marella, V., Upreti, B., Merikivi, J. and Tuunainen, V. K. (2020), “Understanding the Creation of Trust in Cryptocurrencies: The case of Bitcoin”, Electronic Markets, 30, 259-271.
  24. Mendoza-Tello, J. C., Mora, H., Pujol-López, F. A. and Lytras, M. D. (2019), “Disruptive Innovation of Cryptocurrencies in Consumer Acceptance and Trust”, Information Systems and e-Business Management, 17(2), 195-222.
  25. Nadeem, M. A., Liu, Z., Pitafi, A. H., Younis, A. and Xu, Y. (2021), “Investigating the Adoption Factors of Cryptocurrencies—A Case of Bitcoin: Empirical evidence from China”, SAGE Open, 11(1), 2158244021998704.
  26. Nakamoto, S. (2008), “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”, Decentralized Business Review, 21260.
  27. Nunnally, J. C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill. PewInternet.
  28. Ooi, S. K., Ooi, C. A., Yeap, J. A. and Goh, T. H. (2021), “Embracing Bitcoin: Users’ Perceived Security and Trust”, Quality & Quantity, 55(4), 1219-1237.
  29. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y. and Podsakoff, N. P. (2003), “Common Method Biases in Behavioural Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
  30. Rahmiati, R., Engriani, Y. and Putri, R. R. E. (2019), “The Influence of Trust, Perceived Usefulness, and Perceived Ease of Using Intensity of E-Money with Attitude Toward Using Intervening Variable in Padang City”, In Third Padang International Conference on Economics Education, Economics, Business and Management, Accounting and Entrepreneurship (PICEEBA 2019) (pp. 136-141). Atlantis Press.
  31. Sabry, F., Labda, W., Erbad, A. and Malluhi, Q. (2020), “Cryptocurrencies and Artificial İntelligence: Challenges and Opportunities”, IEEE Access, 8, 175840-175858.
  32. Shahzad, F., Xiu, G., Wang, J. and Shahbaz, M. (2018), “An Empirical Investigation on the Adoption of Cryptocurrencies Among the People of Mainland China”, Technology in Society, 55, 33-40.
  33. Salcedo, E. and Gupta, M. (2021), “The Effects of Individual-Level Espoused National Cultural Values on the Willingness to Use Bitcoin-Like Blockchain Currencies”, International Journal of Information Management, 60, 102388.
  34. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H. and Müler, H. (2003), “Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive”, Goodness-of-Fit Measures of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
  35. Shrestha, A. K. and Vassileva, J. (2019), “User Acceptance of Usable Blockchain-Based Research Data Sharing System: An Extended TAM-Based Study”, In 2019 First IEEE International Conference on Trust, Privacy and Security in Intelligent Systems and Applications (TPS-ISA) (pp. 203-208). IEEE.
  36. Teo, A. C., Tan, G. W. H., Cheah, C. M., Ooi, K. B. and Yew, K. T. (2012), “Can the Demographic and Subjective Norms Influence the Adoption of Mobile Banking?”, International Journal of Mobile Communications, 10(6), 578-597.
  37. To, A. T. and Trinh, T. H. M. (2021), “Understanding Behavioural Intention to Use Mobile Wallets in Vietnam: Extending the TAM Model with Trust and Enjoyment”, Cogent Business & Management, 8(1), 1891661.
  38. White, R., Marinakis, Y., Islam, N. and Walsh, S. (2020), “Is Bitcoin a Currency, a Technology-Based Product, or Something Else?”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 151, 119877.
  39. WilsonVon Voorhis, C. R. and Morgan, B. L. (2007), “Understanding Power and Rules of Thumb for Determining Sample Sizes”, Tutorial in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 3(2), 43–50.
  40. Wu, W. Y. and Ke, C. C. (2015), “An Online Shopping Behaviour Model Integrating Personality Traits, Perceived Risk, and Technology Acceptance”, Social Behaviour and Personality: An International Journal, 43(1), 85-97.
  41. Yoo, K., Bae, K., Park, E. and Yang, T. (2020), “Understanding the Diffusion and Adoption of Bitcoin Transaction Services: The Integrated Approach”, Telematics and Informatics, 53, 101302.