한국산업정보학회논문지 (Journal of Korea Society of Industrial Information Systems)

한국산업정보학회 (Korea Society of Industrial Information Systems)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

NFT 구매의도에 영향을 미치는 요인에 관한 실증적 연구

An Empirical Study on Factors Affecting NFT Purchase Intention

  • 이상훈 (대구대학교 컴퓨터정보공학부) ;
  • 김수연 (대구대학교 컴퓨터정보공학부)
  • 투고 : 2022.08.02
  • 심사 : 2022.08.17
  • 발행 : 2022.08.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

최근 빠른 속도로 성장하고 있는 NFT는 점점 우리들의 삶 속에 들어오고 있다. NFT는 대체 불가 토큰(Non-Fungible Token)의 약자로 디지털 데이터에 대하여 소유권을 주장할 수 있게 해주는 기술이다. 디지털 데이터에 소유권이 생기면서 신기술의 특성과 함께 투자가치로서의 특성을 보이고 있으며 앞으로 더 발전할 것으로 전망된다. 본 연구에서는 NFT를 보유하고 있는 사용자들이 어떠한 의도를 가지고 구매하게 되는지에 대한 분석을 수행하고자 하였다. 개인적인 특성과 NFT 자체의 특성, 사회적 특성을 활용하여 구매의도에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 요인들을 선정하고 연구모형을 수립하였다. 실증연구를 수행한 결과, 개인의 혁신성과 NFT의 수익성 및 신뢰성, 그리고 FOMO 요인이 구매의도에 유의한 영향을 주는 것으로 나타났다.

Recently, NFT, which is growing at a rapid pace, is gradually entering our lives. NFT is an acronym for Non-Fungible Token, a technology that allows you to claim ownership of digital data. As ownership of digital data takes over, it is showing characteristics as an investment value along with the characteristics of new technology, and it is expected to develop further in the future. In this study, we tried to analyze the intentions of users who own NFTs to purchase. Factors that can influence purchase intentions were selected and a research model was established using personal characteristics, NFT characteristics, and social characteristics. As a result of conducting an empirical study, it was found that individual innovativeness, profitability and reliability of NFT, and FOMO factors significantly influence purchase intention.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 2019학년도 대구대학교 학술연구비 지원에 의한 논문임.

참고문헌

  1. Abdullah, F. and Ward, R. (2016). Developing a General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-Learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors, Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 238-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.036.
  2. Agarwal, R. and Prasad, J. (1998). A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology, Information Systems Research, 9(2), 204-215. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.9.2.204.
  3. Agudo-Peregrina, A. F., Hernandez-Garcia, A. and Pascual-Miguel, F. J. (2014). Behavioral intention, use behavior and the acceptance of electronic learning systems: Differences between higher education and lifelong learning, Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 301-314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.035.
  4. Ahmad, I., Ahmad, M. O., Ahmad, M. O., Almazroi, A. A., Khan Khalil, M. I. and Alqarni, M. A. (2021). Using algorithmic trading to analyze short term profitability of Bitcoin, PeerJ Computer Science, 7, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.337.
  5. Al-Ammary, J. H., Al-Sherooqi, A. K. and Al-Sherooqi, H. K. (2014). The Acceptance of Social Networking as a Learning Tools at University of Bahrain, International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(2), 208-214. https://doi.org/10.7763/ijiet.2014.v4.400.
  6. Al-Emran, M., Mezhuyev, V. and Kamaludin, A. (2018). Technology Acceptance Model in M-learning context: A systematic review, Computers and Education, 125(August 2017), 389-412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.008.
  7. Alenezi, A. R., Karim, A. M. A. and Veloo, A. (2010). An empirical investigation into the role of enjoyment, computer anxiety, computer self-efficacy and internet experience in influencing the students' intention to use e learning: A case study from saudi arabian governmental universities, Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4), 22-34.
  8. Al-Gahtani, S. S. (2016). Empirical investigation of e-learning acceptance and assimilation: A structural equation model, Applied Computing and Informatics, 12(1), 27-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aci.2014.09.001.
  9. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency, American Psychologist, 37(2), 122-147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122.
  10. Chen, K., Chen, J. V. and Yen, D. C. (2011). Dimensions of self-efficacy in the study of smart phone acceptance, Computer Standards & Interfaces, 33(4), 422-431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2011.01.003.
  11. Cheung, H., Baumber, A. and Brown, P. J. (2022). Barriers and enablers to sustainable finance: A case study of home loans in an Australian retail bank, Journal of Cleaner Production, 334(December 2021), 130211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130211.
  12. Choi, S. W., Lee, S. M., Koh, J. E., Kim, H. J. and Kim, J. S. (2021). A Study on the elements of business model innovation of non-fungible token blockchain game : based on 'PlayDapp' case, an in-game digital asset distribution platform, Journal of Korea Game Society, 21(2), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.7583/JKGS.2021.21.2.123
  13. Chou, S. F., Horng, J. S., Liu, C. H., Yu, T. Y. and Kuo, Y. T. (2022). Identifying the critical factors for sustainable marketing in the catering: The influence of big data applications, marketing innovation, and technology acceptance model factors, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 51(1), 11-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2022.02.010.
  14. Cigdem, H., Ozturk, M. and Topcu, A. (2016). Vocational college students' acceptance of web-based summative listening comprehension test in an EFL course, Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 522-531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.070.
  15. Compeau, D. R. and Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test, MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 19(2), 189-210. https://doi.org/10.2307/249688.
  16. Davidson, M. and Diamond, T. (2020). On the Profitability of Selfish Mining Against Multiple Difficulty Adjustment Algorithms, IACR Cryptology EPrint Archive, (2020/094), 1-22.
  17. 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.
  18. De Angelis, P., De Marchis, R., Marino, M., Martire, A. L. and Oliva, I. (2021). Betting on bitcoin: a profitable trading between directional and shielding strategies, Decisions in Economics and Finance, 44(2), 883-903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10203-021-00324-z.
  19. Ding, Y. (2019). Looking forward: The role of hope in information system continuance, Computers in Human Behavior, 91(September 2018), 127-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.09.002.
  20. Estriegana, R., Medina-Merodio, J. A. and Barchino, R. (2019). Student acceptance of virtual laboratory and practical work: An extension of the technology acceptance model, Computers and Education, 135(February), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.010.
  21. Fadare, O. G., Babatunde, O. H., Akomolafe, D. T. and Lawal, O. O. (2011). Behavioral intention for mobile learning on 3G mobile internet technology in south-west part of Nigeria, World Journal of Engineering and Pure & Applied Sciences, 1(2), 19e28. Retrieved from http://rrpjournals.org/wjepas/en_wjepas_vol_1_iss_2_ pg_19_28.
  22. Fox, G., Clohessy, T., van der Werff, L., Rosati, P. and Lynn, T. (2021). Exploring the competing influences of privacy concerns and positive beliefs on citizen acceptance of contact tracing mobile applications, Computers in Human Behavior, 121(April), 106806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106806.
  23. Hong, W., Liu, R. De, Ding, Y., Jiang, R., Sun, Y. and Jiang, S. (2021). A time-lagged study of two possible routes from personal innovativeness to life satisfaction in adolescents: Learning and social interaction on mobile phones, Personality and Individual Differences, 182(19), 111075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111075.
  24. Hsu, M.-H. and Chiu, C.-M. (2004). Internet self-efficacy and electronic service acceptance, Decision Support Systems, 38(3), 369-381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2003.08.001.
  25. Hwang, I. (2021). The Study on Factors to Improve the Intention to Share Knowledge Using KMS: Focusing on Technology Acceptance Model, Task Stress, Knowledge Share Climate, Journal of the Korea Industrial Information Systems Research, 26(6), 17-34. https://doi.org/10.9723/JKSIIS.2021.26.6.017
  26. Hwang, J., Kim, H. and Kim, W. (2019). Investigating motivated consumer innovativeness in the context of drone food delivery services, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 38(September 2018), 102-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2019.01.004.
  27. Islam, N., Marinakis, Y., Olson, S., White, R. and Walsh, S. (2022). Is BlockChain Mining Profitable in the Long Run?, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2020.3045774.
  28. Jang, Y. and Park, E. (2020). Social acceptance of nuclear power plants in Korea: The role of public perceptions following the Fukushima accident, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 128(May), 109894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.109894.
  29. Jeon, E. K., Oh, S. H., Son, D. H., Lee, S. H., Yoo, H. Y. and Im, K. S. (2022). How Game Changer NFTs Affect the Metaverse, The Journal of The Korean Institute of Communication Sciences, 39(2), 57-63.
  30. Jung, T., Chung, N. and Leue, M. C. (2015). The determinants of recommendations to use augmented reality technologies: The case of a Korean theme park, Tourism Management, 49, 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.02.013.
  31. Kim, B. C. (2021). Why is everyone paying attention to NFTs?, KISO JOURNAL, 44, 1-6.
  32. Lee, H. and Kim, H. (2019). A Study on Cryptocurrency Market in China, Journal of Digital Contents Society, 20(3), 537-545. https://doi.org/10.9728/dcs.2019.20.3.537
  33. Lee, J. Y. and Jo, G. S. (2021). Understanding and Utilizing the Latest NFT Technology, Korea Institute of Information Technology Magazine, 19(1), 7-11. https://doi.org/10.14801/jkiit.2021.19.5.7
  34. Lee, W. S., Choi, D. H. and Kim, J. S. (2021). A Study on the Acceptance of Users in Mobile Transportation Management System: Focusing on Technology Acceptance Models, Journal of the Korea Industrial Information Systems Research, 26(3), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.9723/JKSIIS.2021.26.3.059
  35. Lee, W.-J. (2018). Understanding Consumer Acceptance of Fintech Service : An Extension of the TAM Model to Understand Bitcoin, Journal of Business and Management, 20(7), 34-37. https://doi.org/10.9790/487X-2007023437.
  36. Liu, K. and Tao, D. (2022). The roles of trust, personalization, loss of privacy, and anthropomorphism in public acceptance of smart healthcare services, Computers in Human Behavior, 127(August 2021), 107026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107026.
  37. Luarn, P. and Lin, H. (2005). Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use mobile banking, Computers in Human Behavior, 21(6), 873-891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.003.
  38. Martin, B. A. S., Chrysochou, P., Strong, C., Wang, D. and Yao, J. (2022). Dark personalities and Bitcoin®: The influence of the Dark Tetrad on cryptocurrency attitude and buying intention, Personality and Individual Differences, 188(November 2021), 111453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111453.
  39. Mohammadi, H. (2015). A study of mobile banking loyalty in Iran, Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 35-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.015.
  40. Munoz-Leiva, F., Climent-Climent, S. and Liebana-Cabanillas, F. (2017). Determinants of intention to use the mobile banking apps: An extension of the classic TAM model, Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC, 21(1), 25-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjme.2016.12.001.
  41. Mutambara, D. and Bayaga, A. (2021). Determinants of mobile learning acceptance for STEM education in rural areas, Computers and Education, 160(September 2020), 104010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104010.
  42. Oyman, M., Bal, D. and Ozer, S. (2022). Extending the technology acceptance model to explain how perceived augmented reality affects consumers' perceptions, Computers in Human Behavior, 128(August 2021), 107127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107127.
  43. Park, E. (2019). Social acceptance of green electricity: Evidence from the structural equation modeling method, Journal of Cleaner Production, 215, 796-805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.075.
  44. Park, S. H. and Lee, J. E. (2021). Effects of Information System Quality on the Technology Acceptance Model and User Intention, Journal of the Korea Industrial Information Systems Research, 26(5), 21-35. https://doi.org/10.9723/JKSIIS.2021.26.5.003
  45. Sciarelli, M., Prisco, A., Gheith, M. H. and Muto, V. (2021). Factors affecting the adoption of blockchain technology in innovative Italian companies: an extended TAM approach, Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(3), 495-507. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-02-2021-0054.
  46. Seok. Y. N. and Yoon, B. K. (2022). The effect of smart tourism technology and memorable tourism experience (MTE) on continuous use intention : Focusing on the technology acceptance model (TAM), International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 36(3), 73-89. https://doi.org/10.21298/IJTHR.2022.3.36.3.73
  47. Shin, J., Moon, S., Cho, B. ho, Hwang, S. and Choi, B. (2022). Extended technology acceptance model to explain the mechanism of modular construction adoption, Journal of Cleaner Production, 342(February), 130963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130963.
  48. Song, W. Y. (2022). Comparative Legal Review on NFT Regulation ? Focusing on Security-type NFTs and Virtual Asset-type NFTs?, The Korean Journal of Securities Law, 23(1), 251-286. https://doi.org/10.17785/KJSL.2022.23.1.251
  49. Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies, Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
  50. Wang, R., Zhao, X., Wang, W. and Jiang, L. (2021). What factors affect the public acceptance of new energy vehicles in underdeveloped regions? A case study of Gansu Province, China, Journal of Cleaner Production, 318(967), 128432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128432.
  51. Wang, X., Chao, F., Yu, G. and Zhang, K. (2022). Factors influencing fake news rebuttal acceptance during the COVID-19 pandemic and the moderating effect of cognitive ability, Computers in Human Behavior, 130(June 2021), 107174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107174.
  52. Xu, Q. and Hwang, B. G. (BG), & Lu, Y. (2021). Households' acceptance analysis of a marketized behavioral intervention - Household energy-saving option, Journal of Cleaner Production, 318(July), 128493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128493.
  53. Yang, Y. and Wang, X. (2019). Modeling the intention to use machine translation for student translators: An extension of Technology Acceptance Model, Computers and Education, 133(January), 116-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.01.015.
  54. Yeong, Y.-C. (2019). What drives cryptocurrency acceptance in Malaysia?, Science Proceedings Series, 1(2), 47-50. https://doi.org/10.31580/sps.v1i2.625.