Teknoloji Farkındalığı ve Metaverse Benimseme Niyeti Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi: Planlı Davranış Teorisine Dayalı Bir Düzenleyici Aracılık Modeli

Öz

Bu çalışma, teknoloji farkındalığının çalışanların metaverse teknolojisini kullanma niyetini nasıl şekillendirdiğini açıklayan işleyişi ele almaktadır. Planlanmış davranış teorisini esas alan bu çalışma, tutum, öznel normlar ve algılanan davranışsal kontrolün aracı rollerini de açıklamaktadır. Ayrıca, tüm aracı etkileri açıklamak için algılanan riski bir moderatör olarak ele almaktadır. Veri, İstanbul'da hizmet sektöründe faaliyet gösteren işletmelerde çalışan 384 kişinin katılımıyla gerçekleştirilen kesitsel bir anket çalışmasıyla toplanmış ve SmartPLS kullanılarak kısmi en küçük kareler yapısal eşitlik modellemesi tekniğiyle analiz edilmiştir. Sonuçlar, teknoloji farkındalığının üç aracı değişken aracılığıyla çalışanların metaverse kullanma niyetini önemli ölçüde etkilediğini göstermektedir. Dahası, algılanan risk, teknoloji farkındalığını metaverse teknolojisini kullanma niyetine bağlayan tüm aracı değişkenlerin önemli bir moderatörüdür. Bu görgül araştırma, planlanmış davranış literatürüne katkıda bulunmanın yanı sıra, hizmet sektöründe faaliyet gösteren işletmeler için pratik bilgiler de sağlamaktadır. Bu araştırma, iş yerinde teknoloji farkındalığı girişimlerinin önemini ve metaverse platformlarında faaliyet gösterirken algılanan riskleri azaltma ihtiyacının anlaşılmasına yardımcı olmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Teknoloji Farkındalığı
• metaverse
• planlı davranış teorisi
• algılanan risk

Technology Awareness and Metaverse Adoption Intentions: A Moderated Mediation Model Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior

Öz

This study explains the mechanism by which technology awareness shapes employees’ intention to use metaverse technology. Applying the theory of planned behavior, this study also explains the mediating roles of attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. It also uses perceived risk as a moderator that weakens all mediation effects. Data were collected through a cross-sectional survey of 384 employees in service organizations in Istanbul. For analysis, partial least squares structural equation modeling was performed using SmartPLS. The results show that technology awareness significantly affects employees’ intention to use the metaverse through the three mediating variables. Moreover, perceived risk is a significant moderator of all mediating variables linking technology awareness to the intention to use metaverse technology. This empirical research not only contributes to the planned behavior literature but also provides practical insights for service organizations. It helps them realize the significance of technology awareness initiatives in the workplace and the need to mitigate perceived risks when operating within metaverse platforms.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Technology awareness
• metaverse
• theory of planned behavior
• perceived risk

Etik Beyan

• Name of the institution granting ethical approval: Istanbul Ticaret University Ethics Committee. • Approval date and number: Date: 05.12.2024, Document No: E-65836846-044-339411. • Brief description of the ethical approval: The questionnaire entitled “Investigating Relationships between Technology Awareness and Intention to Use Metaverse: Mediating Roles of Attitude toward Metaverse, Subjective Norms toward Metaverse and Perceived Behavioral Control Over Using Metaverse and Moderating Role of Perceived Risk of Using Metaverse” was reviewed by the Ethics Committee and found to comply with ethical principles and standards.

Kaynakça

1. Adu-Gyamfi, G., Song, H., Obuobi, B., Nketiah, E., Wang, H., & Cudjoe, D. (2022). Who will adopt? Investigating the adoption intention for battery swap technology for electric vehicles. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 156, 111979.
2. Alfaisal, R., Hashim, H., & Azizan, U. H. (2024). Metaverse system adoption in education: a systematic literature review. Journal of Computers in Education, 11(1), 259-303.
3. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
4. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self‐efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 32(4), 665-683.
5. Albayati, H., Alistarbadi, N., & Rho, J. J. (2023). Assessing engagement decisions in NFT Metaverse based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Telematics and Informatics Reports, 10, 100045.
6. Al-Emran, M., Al-Sharafi, M. A., Foroughi, B., Iranmanesh, M., Alsharida, R. A., Al-Qaysi, N., & Ali, N. A. (2024). Evaluating the barriers affecting cybersecurity behavior in the Metaverse using PLS-SEM and fuzzy sets (fsQCA). Computers in Human Behavior, 159, 108315.
7. Al-Sharafi, M. A., Al-Emran, M., Al-Qaysi, N., Iranmanesh, M., & Ibrahim, N. (2024). Drivers and barriers affecting metaverse adoption: a systematic review, theoretical framework, and avenues for future research. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 40(22), 7043-7064.
8. Alshammari, M. M., & Al-Mamary, Y. H. (2025). User acceptance of AI-powered training: extending the technology acceptance model (TAM). Future Business Journal, 11(1), 239.

9. Alsharida, R. A., Al-rimy, B. A. S., Al-Emran, M., Al-Sharafi, M. A., & Zainal, A. (2025). Predicting cybersecurity behaviors in the metaverse through the lenses of TTAT and TPB: a hybrid SEM-ANN approach. Online Information Review.
10. Arias-Pérez, J., & Vélez-Jaramillo, J. (2022). Ignoring the three-way interaction of digital orientation, Not-invented-here syndrome and employee's artificial intelligence awareness in digital innovation performance: A recipe for failure. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121305.
11. Arpaci, I., Karatas, K., Kusci, I., & Al-Emran, M. (2022). Understanding the social sustainability of the Metaverse by integrating UTAUT2 and big five personality traits: A hybrid SEM-ANN approach. Technology in Society, 71, 102120.
12. Azhar, M., Ali, R., & Naz, A. (2024). Faith in metaverse: understanding adoption intentions of metaverse amongst the Muslim students. Journal of Islamic Marketing.
13. Bao, X., Yu, J., & Shou, M. (2024). Exploring metaverse: affordances and risks for potential users. Information Technology & People.
14. Bell, E., Bryman, A., & Kleinknecht, S. W. (2023). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.
15. Chakraborty, D., Polisetty, A., Khorana, S., & Buhalis, D. (2023). Use of metaverse in socializing: Application of the Big Five personality traits framework. Psychology & Marketing.
16. Chen, L., Wang, Y., Peng, J., & Xiao, Q. (2024). Supply chain management based on uncertainty theory: a bibliometric analysis and future prospects. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 1-38.
17. Chen, Z. (2024). Metaverse office: Exploring future teleworking model. Kybernetes, 53(6), 2029-2045.
18. Chong, K. M., Cham, T. H., Lau, E., Wong, B. K. M., & Syed Annuar, S. N. (2023). Log Out or Stay Connected? Unveiling the Intention for Continuous Use in the Metaverse. In Current and Future Trends on Intelligent Technology Adoption: Volume 1 (pp. 1-22). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
19. Dirsehan, T., & Can, C. (2020). Examination of trust and sustainability concerns in autonomous vehicle adoption. Technology in Society, 63, 101361.
20. Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Baabdullah, A. M., Ribeiro-Navarrete, S., Giannakis, M., Al-Debei, M. M., ... & Wamba, S. F. (2022). Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International journal of information management, 66, 102542.
21. Flavián, C., Pérez-Rueda, A., Belanche, D., & Casaló, L. V. (2022). Intention to use analytical artificial intelligence (AI) in services–the effect of technology readiness and awareness. Journal of Service Management, 33(2), 293-320.
22. Gawshinde, S., Al-Aflak, A., & Khurana, A. (2023, December). Metaverse Adaptability in Theory Context. In International Working Conference on Transfer and Diffusion of IT (pp. 389-398). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
23. Geisser, S. (1974). A predictive approach to the random effect model. Biometrika, 61(1), 101-107.
24. Gursoy, D., Lu, L., Nunkoo, R., & Deng, D. (2023). Metaverse in services marketing: an overview and future research directions. The Service Industries Journal, 43(15-16), 1140-1172.
25. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis.
26. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European business review, 31(1), 2-24.
27. Hasani, T., Rezania, D., & Mohammadi, M. (2024). Towards a framework for successful metaverse adoption in small and medium-sized enterprises: an exploratory study. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 16, 18479790241257118.
28. Hennig-Thurau, T., Aliman, D. N., Herting, A. M., Cziehso, G. P., Linder, M., & Kübler, R. V. (2023). Social interactions in the metaverse: Framework, initial evidence, and research roadmap. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 51(4), 889-913.
29. Heruatmadja, C. H., & Ramadhan, A. (2023). Drivers and barriers of intention to work within metaverse environment. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 1-25.
30. Hosseiny, S. H., Bozorg-Haddad, O., & Bocchiola, D. (2021). Water, culture, civilization, and history. In Economical, Political, and Social Issues in Water Resources (pp. 189-216). Elsevier.
31. Jafar, R. M. S., & Ahmad, W. (2024). Tourist loyalty in the metaverse: the role of immersive tourism experience and cognitive perceptions. Tourism Review, 79(2), 321-336.
32. Jo, H. (2023). Tourism in the digital frontier: A study on user continuance intention in the metaverse. Information Technology & Tourism, 25(3), 307-330.
33. Khan, R. A., & Qudrat-Ullah, H. (2021). Adoption of LMS in higher educational institutions of the Middle East. New York: Springer.
34. Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (ijec), 11(4), 1-10.
35. Koohang, A., Nord, J., Ooi, K., Tan, G., Al-Emran, M., Aw, E., ... & Wong, L. (2023). Shaping the metaverse into reality: multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges, and future research. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 63(3), 735-765.
36. Kumar, A., Shankar, A., Shaik, A. S., Jain, G., & Malibari, A. (2023). Risking it all in the metaverse ecosystem: forecasting resistance towards the enterprise metaverse. Information Technology & People.
37. Kumar, A., Shankar, A., Agarwal, R., Agarwal, V., & Alzeiby, E. A. (2024). With enterprise metaverse comes great possibilities! Understanding metaverse usage intention from an employee perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 78, 103767.
38. Kumar, A., Shankar, A., & Nayal, P. (2024). Metaverse is not my cup of tea! An investigation into how personality traits shape metaverse usage intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 77, 103639.
39. Lau, M. M., Ng, P. M. L., Chan, E. A. H., & Cheung, C. T. Y. (2023). Examining purchase intention for luxury fashion: integrating theory of reasoned action, with affect-behavior-cognition (ABC) model, identity and social identity theories. Young Consumers, 24(1), 114-131.
40. Lim, W. M., & Weissmann, M. A. (2023). Toward a theory of behavioral control. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 31(1), 185-211.
41. Liu, S., & Mair, J. (2023). The impact of uncertainty on tourists’ controllability, mood state and the persuasiveness of message framing in the pandemic era. Tourism Management, 94, 104634.
42. Liu, H., & Park, K. S. (2024). Exploring the impact of metaverse tourism experiences on actual visit intentions: An integrated model of presence, the Technology Acceptance Model, and the Theory of Planned Behavior. International Journal of Tourism Research, 26(1), e2616.
43. Louisot, J. P. (2024). Managing Risk in the Metaverse. In Enterprise Risk Management in Today's World: A Current and Futuristic View of the Complexity, Resilience, Responsibility and Tools in ERM, Part B (pp. 173-184). Emerald Publishing Limited.
44. Marabelli, M., & Lirio, P. (2024). AI and the metaverse in the workplace: DEI opportunities and challenges. Personnel Review.
45. Mohanraj, D., Gangadharan, S., Nirmala, G., & Ramesh, M. G. (2023). Impact of Techno-Stress on Job Performance Among its Employees in Chennai City. European Economic Letters (EEL), 13(5), 1435-1441.
46. Okorley, E. N. A., Mensah, J. V., & Amoah-Mensah, A. (2024). Social learning theory outcomes and organizational performance: evidence from Ghana telecom firms. Journal of Management and Governance, 1-28.
47. Ooi, K. B., Tan, G. W. H., Aw, E. C. X., Cham, T. H., Dwivedi, Y. K., Dwivedi, R., ... & Sharma, A. (2023). Banking in the metaverse: a new frontier for financial institutions. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 41(7), 1829-1846.
48. Pacey, A., & Bray, F. (2021). Technology in World Civilization, revised and expanded edition: A Thousand-Year History. Mit Press.
49. Park, E. (2024). Examining Metaverse Game Platform Adoption: Insights from Innovation, Behavior, and Coolness. Technology in Society, 102594.
50. Phamthi, V. A., Nagy, Á., & Ngo, T. M. (2024). The influence of perceived risk on purchase intention in e‐commerce—Systematic review and research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 48(4), e13067.
51. Pillai, R., Ghanghorkar, Y., Sivathanu, B., Algharabat, R., & Rana, N. P. (2024). Adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) based employee experience (EEX) chatbots. Information Technology & People, 37(1), 449-478.
52. Pillai, R., Sivathanu, B., Rana, N. P., Preet, R., & Mishra, A. (2024). Factors Influencing Customers’ Apparel Shopping Intention in Metaverse. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 1-16.
53. Pradhananga, A. K., & Davenport, M. A. (2022). “I Believe I Can and Should”: Self‐efficacy, Normative Beliefs and Conservation Behavior. Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education, 175(1), 15-32.
54. Raddatz, N., Coyne, J., Menard, P., & Crossler, R. E. (2023). Becoming a blockchain user: understanding consumers’ benefits realisation to use blockchain-based applications. European Journal of Information Systems, 32(2), 287-314.
55. Rahimi, R. A., & Oh, G. S. (2024). Beyond theory: a systematic review of strengths and limitations in technology acceptance models through an entrepreneurial lens. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 1-24.
56. Rajendra, P., Kumari, M., Rani, S., Dogra, N., Boadh, R., Kumar, A., & Dahiya, M. (2022). Impact of artificial intelligence on civilization: Future perspectives. Materials Today: Proceedings, 56, 252-256.
57. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2024). SmartPLS 4. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS (2022).
58. Saini, N., & Shri, C. (2024). Environmental, social, and governance reporting adoption factors for sustainable development at the country level. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1-40.
59. Saunders, M. N., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business students (Eighth). Harlow: Pearson education limited.
60. Shehawy, Y. M., Khan, S. M. F. A., & Alshammakhi, Q. M. (2026). The knowledgeable nexus between Metaverse startups and SDGs: The role of innovations in community building and socio-cultural exchange. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 17(1), 2433-2468.
61. Sheth, J. N., & Venkatesan, M. (1968). Risk-reduction processes in repetitive consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing research, 5(3), 307-310.
62. Sokołowski, A., Wrzalik, A., & Niedbał, R. (2023). Blockchain Technology Awareness Among Managers of Large Enterprise. Procedia Computer Science, 225, 3031-3039.
63. Slovic, P. (1967). The relative influence of probabilities and payoffs upon perceived risk of a gamble. Psychonomic Science, 9(4), 223-224.
64. Shahzad, K., Ashfaq, M., Zafar, A. U., & Basahel, S. (2024). Is the future of the metaverse bleak or bright? Role of realism, facilitators, and inhibitors in metaverse adoption. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 209, 123768.
65. Šímová, T., & Zychová, K. (2023). Who and What is Driving Remote Working Research? A Bibliometric Study. Vision, 09722629221139064.
66. Smith, H. (2025). The metaverse-industrial complex. Information, Communication & Society, 28(5), 797-814.
67. Stone, M. (1974). Cross‐validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the royal statistical society: Series B (Methodological), 36(2), 111-133.
68. Van Der Pligt, J. (1998). Perceived risk and vulnerability as predictors of precautionary behaviour. British journal of health psychology, 3(1), 1-14.
69. Venkatesh, V. (2025). Paradigm changing metaverse: future research directions in design, technology adoption and use, and impacts. Decision Support Systems, 188, 114307.
70. Wang, L., Feng, X., & Zang, L. (2024). Does risk perception influence individual investors' crowdfunding investment decision-making behavior in the metaverse tourism?. Finance Research Letters, 62, 105168.
71. Weinberger, M., & Gross, D. (2023). A comparison of virtual worlds based on the metaverse maturity model. ITU Journal on Future and Evolving Technologies, 4(4), 537-548.
72. Xi, N., Chen, J., Gama, F., Korkeila, H., & Hamari, J. (2024). Acceptance of the metaverse: a laboratory experiment on augmented and virtual reality shopping. Internet Research, 34(7), 82-117.
73. Yang, C., & Jiang, P. (2024). The effect of employee STARA awareness on job crafting: exploring the moderating role of positive stress mindset. Journal of Managerial Psychology.
74. Yin, M., Jiang, S., & Niu, X. (2024). Can AI really help? The double-edged sword effect of AI assistant on employees’ innovation behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 150, 107987.
75. Zhou, Z., Chen, Z., & Jin, X. L. (2024). A review of the literature on the metaverse: definition, technologies, and user behaviors. Internet Research, 34(1), 129-148.
76. Xie, J., Ye, L., Huang, W., & Ye, M. (2021). Understanding FinTech platform adoption: impacts of perceived value and perceived risk. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(5), 1893-1911.