The Influence of Perceived Digital Financial Literacy on Cryptocurrency Investment Behavior of Investors in the Bangkok Metropolitan Region
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research article aimed to develop and examine the goodness of fit of the causal relationship model. In addition, examine the direct effects, the indirect effect mediated by cognitive bias, and the moderating effect of investing experience on cryptocurrency investment behavior among investors in the Bangkok Metropolitan Region. This study was quantitative research. The sample consisted of 421 investors who had experience investing in cryptocurrency and resided in the Bangkok Metropolitan Region, selected by convenience sampling. Data were collected using an online questionnaire, and the statistics used for data analysis were descriptive statistics including frequency and percentage, confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modeling. The results showed that the causal relationship model of cryptocurrency investment behavior developed in this study demonstrated a good fit with the empirical data across all fit indices, and all latent variables showed acceptable reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Hypotheses 1, 3, 4, and 5 were statistically supported at the .01 level, whereas Hypothesis 2 was not supported. Perceived digital financial literacy had a significant positive direct effect on cryptocurrency investment behavior and, contrary to the hypothesized direction, a significant positive direct effect on cognitive bias. Cognitive bias had a significant positive direct effect on cryptocurrency investment behavior and showed complementary partial mediation between perceived digital financial literacy and cryptocurrency investment behavior. Finally, investing experience significantly moderated the relationship between cognitive bias and cryptocurrency investment behavior; the positive effect of cognitive bias was stronger among more experienced investors.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
บริษัท หลักทรัพย์จัดการกองทุน ไทยพาณิชย์ จำกัด. (2568). รายงานประจำปี กองทุนรวมโครงสร้างพื้นฐานโทรคมนาคมดิจิทัล ปี 2568. สืบค้นจาก https://www.scbam.com/medias/fund-doc/annual/DIF_ANN_TH.pdf.
ศิริลักษณ์ ทัดเทียม และ นนทร์ วรพาณิชช์. (2565). ปัจจัยที่ส่งผลต่อการใช้คริปโทเคอร์เรนซี การวิเคราะห์โดยใช้แบบจำลองสมการโครงสร้างและการวิเคราะห์เส้นทาง. วารสารสังคมศาสตร์ปัญญาพัฒน์, 4(3), 31–44.
ศุขจิภา ศรีภิรมย์, พัชรา ตันติประภา และ อรชร มณีสงฆ์. (2568). การเปรียบเทียบพฤติกรรมการเลือกลงทุนในคริปโทเคอร์เรนซีของเจเนอเรชันซีเพศชายและหญิง. วารสารปัญญาภิวัฒน์, 17(2), 143–158.
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกำกับหลักทรัพย์และตลาดหลักทรัพย์. (2569). รายงานสรุปภาวะตลาดสินทรัพย์ดิจิทัลรายเดือน. สืบค้นจาก https://www.sec.or.th/TH/Pages/DAMonthlyReport.aspx.
Addo, J. O., Cúg, J., Keelson, S. A., Amoah, J., & Petráková, Z. (2025). Behavioral risk management in investment strategies: Analyzing investor psychology. International Journal of Financial Studies, 13(2), 53.
Aftab, R., Fazal, A., & Andleeb, R. (2025). Behavioral biases and Fintech adoption: Investigating the role of financial literacy. Acta psychologica, 257, 105065.
Ahmad, U., Van Keulen, M., Briassouli, A., & Saad, M. (2025). Cognitive biases, Robo advisor and investment decision psychology: An investor's perspective from New York stock exchange. Acta psychologica, 256, 105048.
Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49(2), 155-173.
Babu, D. R., Sreenivas, T., Kumar, N. H., Panda, H. K., & Reddy, B. R. (2025). Behavioural biases and the diversification puzzle: Why investors fail to build optimal portfolios. International Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 1(1), 23-26.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
Bentler, P. M. (2005). EQS 6 Structural Equations Program Manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
Bosch-Rosa, C., & Corgnet, B. (2022). Cognitive finance. In S. Füllbrunn & E. Haruvy (Eds.), Handbook of experimental finance (pp. 73-88). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Chen, H., & Volpe, R. P. (1998). An analysis of personal financial literacy among college students. Financial services review, 7(2), 107-128.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Coingecko. (2026). 2026 Q1 crypto industry report. Retrieved from https://www.coingecko.com/research/publications/2026-q1-crypto-industry-report.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50.
Hadiwidjaja, R. D., Trisnowati, Y., & Kahar, M. R. (2026). The digital financial literacy and current financial behavior in Indonesia small medium enterprise. Jurnal Akuntansi, Keuangan, Pajak dan Informasi, 6(1), 47-58.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 43(1), 115-135.
Hoelter, J. W. (1983). The effects of role evaluation and commitment on identity salience. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46(2), 140–147.
Iamin, G. (2025). Are crypto-investors overconfident? The role of risk propensity and demographics. Evidence from Brazil and Portugal. The Journal of Risk Finance, 26(1), 147-173.
Katenova, M., Frolova, Y., & Schmunkamp, P. (2025). Behavioral Finance in the sphere of investment: Systematic Review of Literature between 2020 and 2025. F1000Research, 14, 949.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Koskelainen, T., Kalmi, P., Scornavacca, E., & Vartiainen, T. (2023). Financial literacy in the digital age-A research agenda. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 57(1), 507-528.
Likert, R. (1967). The method of constructing an attitude scale. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in attitude theory and measurement (pp. 90–95). New York: Wiley.
Lipshits, R., Goldstein, K., Goldstein, A., Eichel, R., & Goldstein, A. (2025). Novel Approach to Modeling Investor Decision-Making Using the Dual-Process Theory: Synthesizing Experimental Methods from Within-Subjects to Between-Subjects Designs. Mathematics, 13(19), 3090.
Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2014). The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and evidence. Journal of economic literature, 52(1), 5-44.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130–149.
Maheshwari, H., & Samantaray, A. K. (2026). Navigating investment challenges: financial literacy and digital advisory services in countering behavioural biases. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 46(3-4), 409-425.
Nofsinger, J. R. (2017). The psychology of investing. (6th ed.). New York: Routledge.
OECD. (2026). Digital financial literacy core competency framework for adults in ASEAN. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.
Ruiz-Dotras, E., & Llados-Masllorens, J. (2026). Investment Experience and Financial Vulnerability: The Role of Financial Literacy, Gender and Social Context. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 19(5), 369.
van den Akker, M. M. L. H. (2025). The adaptive nudge framework: advancing ethical behavioural design in financial decision-making. Journal of Social Impact in Business Research, 1(2), 3-19.
Yadav, M. (2024). Behavioral biases of cryptocurrency investors: a prospect theory model to explain cryptocurrency returns. Review of Behavioral Finance, 16(4), 643-667.