Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2205.15398

Can I invest in Metaverse? The effect of obtained information and perceived risk on purchase intention by the perspective of the information adoption model

Abstract

Metaverse is a virtual universe that combines the physical world and the digital world. People can socialize, play games and even shop with their avatars created in this virtual environment. Metaverse, which is growing very fast in terms of investment, is both a profitable and risky area for consumers. In order to enter the Metaverse for investment purposes, it is necessary to do a certain research and gather information. In this direction, the aim of the study is to determine the effect of the quality of the information obtained by the consumers about the metaverse world, the reliability of the information and the perceived risk, on the purchase intention from the point of view of the information adoption model. For the research, data were collected online from 495 consumers who were interested in metaverse investment. AMOS and SPSS package programs were used in the analysis. First, descriptive statistical analyzes were made for the basic structure of the variables. Then the reliability and validity of the model were tested. Finally, the structural equation model was used to test the proposed model. According to the findings, the reliability and quality of the information affect the purchase intention positively and significantly, while the perceived risk affects the purchase intention negatively and significantly.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

İbrahim Halil Efendioğlu. 2022-08-17. Can I invest in Metaverse? The effect of obtained information and perceived risk on purchase intention by the perspective of the information adoption model. https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.15398

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN