Digital financial technology acceptance scale; A scale development study

Öz

The study aims to the steps of constructing a Digital Financial Technology Acceptance/Adoption Scale based on the conceptual framework of the Technology Acceptance Model. The target population of the survey is adult individuals who has smart mobile devices. This population also includes elderly, whose cognitive abilities are assumed to be lower than the younger. In the development phase of the scale in which this group has been especially pay regard to; the conceptual and theoretical background of the financial literacy, digital literacy, self-efficacy beliefs in the use of digital financial technologies, perceived ease of use of the technology, perceived usefullness of the technology, behavioral attitude and behavioral intention factors in the acceptance of the digital financial technology are introduced. Key points that taken into consideration in the process of forming the items were pointed out. In the last part, factor analysis and statistical results were evaluated. Analysis and tests results of the scales which developed by following the principals of the development of a scale; shows us that, the KMO test is over 0.50, and the internal consistency is over 0.70. The results indicates that the measurement tool produced valid and reliable scores.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Scale Development
• Technology Acceptance Model
• Digital Literacy
• Financial Literacy
• Self-efficacy Beliefs
• Mobile Banking Apps

Dijital finansal teknoloji benimseme ölçeği; Bir ölçme aracı geliştirme çalışması

Öz

Bu çalışmada, Teknoloji Kabul Modeli konseptinde bir Dijital Finansal Teknoloji Kabul/Benimseme Ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi süreci açıklanmıştır. Ölçme aracının kullanıldığı hedef popülasyon, akıllı mobil cihaz sahibi yetişkin bireylerdir. Bu popülasyona, bilişsel yeteneklerinin, genç nüfusa kıyasla daha yavaş olduğu varsayılan yaş almış bireyler de dahildir. Bu bireylerin özellikle gözetildiği ölçme aracının geliştirilmesi aşamasında; öncelikle modelde yer alan finansal okuryazarlık, dijital okuryazarlık, dijital finansal teknolojilerin kullanımına yönelik özyeterlik inancı, dijital finansal teknolojinin kullanımına yönelik algılanan kullanım kolaylığı, algılanan fayda, teknolojinin kabulüne yönelik tutum ve niyet faktörlerinin kavramsal ve teorik altyapısı açıklanmıştır. Daha sonra ölçeklere ilişkin madde havuzunun oluşturulması sürecinde dikkate alınan ilkeler belirtilmiştir. Son olarak, ölçeklere ilişkin istatistiksel test ve analizler yapılarak, sonuçları değerlendirilmiştir. Ölçme ve değerlendirme ilkeleri gözetilerek geliştirilen ölçeklerin, analiz ve test sonuçlarına göre KMO testi sonucunun 0,50’nin üzerinde olduğu, ölçümlerin sonucunda, maddeler arası iç tutarlık sonuçlarının ise 0,70’in üzerinde olduğu görülmüştür. Bulgular, geliştirilen ölçeklerin geçerli ve güvenilir puanlar ürettiklerini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ölçek geliştirme
• Teknoloji kabul modeli
• Dijital okuryazarlık
• Finansal okuryazarlık
• Özyeterlik inancı
• Mobil bankacılık uygulamaları.

Kaynakça

1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
2. Ajzen, I., ve Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
3. Bandura, A. (1977a). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
4. Bandura, A. (1977b). Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
5. Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for Constructing Self-Efficacy Scales. T. Urdan ve F. Pajares, Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents içinde (307-337). Greenwich: Age Information Publishing.
6. Davis, F. D. (1986). A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New end-user Information Systems: Theory and Results. Doktora Tezi. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management.
7. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(4), 319-340.
8. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., ve Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.

9. Field, A. (2018). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics (5. baskı). Newbury Park: Sage Publications Ltd.
10. Fishbein, M. (1967). A behavior theory approach to the relations between beliefs about an object and the attitude toward the object. M. Fishbein, Readings in attitude theory and measurement içinde (389-400). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
11. Fishbein, M. (2008). Reasoned Action, Theory of. The International Encyclopedia of Communication. 8 Mart 2017. Wiley Online Library. Erişim 4 Şubat 2024. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0075
12. Fishbein, M., ve Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
13. Horn, J. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), s. 179-185.
14. http-1. Türkiye Bankalar Birliği. Finansal Okuryazarlık nedir?. Erişim 12 Mayıs 2023. https://foy.tbb.org.tr/finansal-okuryazarlik-nedir
15. http-2. Google Akademik. Erişim 28 Mart 2024. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=tr&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=attitude+components+&btnG=
16. http-3. APA Dictionary of Psychology. Erişim 12 Eylül 2024. https://dictionary.apa.org/psychometrics adresinden alındı
17. Huston, S. J. (2010). Measuring Financial Literacy. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 44(2), 296-316.
18. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An Index Of Simplicity. Psychometrika, 1(39), s. 31-36.
19. Kemp, S. (2019). Digital 2019: TURKEY. DATAREPORTAL. Erişim 20 Eylül 2022, https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2019-turkey adresinden alındı
20. Kemp, S. (2020). Digital 2020: TURKEY. DATAREPORTAL. Erişim 20 Eylül 2022, https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2020-turkey
21. Kemp, S. (2024). Digital 2024: TURKEY. 2024, DATAREPORTAL. Erişim 27 Şubat 2024, https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2024-turkey
22. Lusardi, A., ve Mitchell, O. S. (2011). Financial Literacy and Planning:Implications for Retirement Well-Being. Pension Research Council Working Paper WP2006-01.
23. Madden, T. J., Ellen, P., ve Ajzen, I. (1992). A Comparison of the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Theory of Reasoned Action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 3-9.
24. Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of Economics (8. baskı). Londra: Macmillan and Co., Ltd.
25. Marsiske, M., Lang, F. R., Baltes, P. B., ve Baltes, M. M. (1995). Selective optimization with compensation: Life-span perspectives on successful human development. R. Dixon & L. Bäckman (Ed), Psychological compensation: Managing losses and promoting gains içinde. (35-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
26. Ng, W. (2012). Can We Teach Digital Natives Digital Literacy? Computers & Education, 52, 1065-1078.
27. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2. baskı). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
28. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. The Strategic Planning Resource For Education Professionals, 9(5), 1-6.
29. Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of Innovations. New York: London, Free Press.
30. Rosenberg, M., ve Hovland, C. (1960). Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Components of Attitudes. Attitude Organization and Change: An Analysis of Consistency among Attitude Components,. Yale University Press New Heaven.
31. Saçkes, M., Trundle, K., Tuckman, B., ve Krissek, L. (2012). Development of the Efficacy Beliefs for Conceptual Change Learning Questionnaire. The Journal of Experimental Education, 80(4), 338-351.
32. Salthouse, T. A. (1996). The Processing-Speed Theory. Psychological Review, 103(3), 403-428.
33. Schiffman, L., ve Kanuk, L. (2004). Consumer Behaviour (8. baskı). New York: Pearson Educations.
34. Spooncer, F. (1992). Behavioural studies for marketing and business. Leckhampton: Stanley Thornes.
35. Thomae, H. (1970). Theory of aging and cognitive theory. Human Development, 13(1), 1-16.
36. Türkiye Bankalar Birliği [TBB]. (2024). Dijital, İnternet ve Mobil Bankacılık İstatistikleri. Erişim 29 Mart 2024, /https://www.tbb.org.tr/Content/Upload/istatistikiraporlar/ekler/4487/Dijital-Internet-Mobil_Bankacilik_Istatistikleri-Mart_2024.pdf
37. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu [TÜİK]. (2024). TÜİK -Veri Portalı: Yaşlı nüfus 8 milyon 722 bin 806 kişi oldu. Erişim 29 Mart 2024, https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Elderly-Statistics-2023-53710
38. Venkatesh, V., ve Bala, H. (2008). Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273-315.
39. Venkatesh, V., ve Davis, F. (2000). Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
40. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., ve Davis, F. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
41. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J., ve Xu, X. (2012). Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178.
42. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Pres.