The Influence of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use on Preference of Undergraduate ITB Students on Choosing Mutual Fund Investment Platform

(1)

The Influence of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use on Preference of Undergraduate ITB Students on Choosing

Mutual Fund Investment Platform

Timothy Joshua Sembiring^1*

1 School of Business and Management, Bandung Institute of Technology, Bandung, Indonesia

*Corresponding Author: [email protected] Accepted: 15 August 2022 | Published: 1 September 2022

DOI:https://doi.org/10.55057/ijaref.2022.4.3.11

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Abstract: From the beginning of the pandemic until now, many new investors have emerged.

Some securities also issue various innovations so that investors can invest effectively. Not only securities, even electronic wallet providers also work with securities so that they can invest in their e-wallet applications. In today's era, investors are given many choices in determining the desired investment platform, including mutual fund investment. This study will try to examine the effect of perceived usefulness and perceived ease on the selection of a mutual fund investment platform by undergraduate students at the Bandung Institute of Technology. This research has found that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of mutual fund investment applications have a significant positive effect on the selection of mutual fund investment platforms by undergraduate students at the Bandung Institute of Technology. The findings of this study emphasize the importance of the mutual fund investment platform provider to develop the features available on the mutual fund investment platform in order to increase the perceived usefulness, and to develop the User Interface and User Experience of the platform in order to increase the perceived ease of use of the mutual fund investment platform.

Keywords: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, mutual fund investment platform, mutual fund investment, investor

___________________________________________________________________________

1. Introduction

Investment is a term that refers to several funds or other funding options that a firm uses to build its assets by distributing investment returns in the form of interest, royalties, and dividends with the hopes of gaining further or future benefits from these funds. (Nur Ismail et al., 2021). During the pandemic, the number of new investors increased. Various investment instruments are increasingly in demand such as stocks, mutual funds, bonds, and other instruments. Several E-Wallet companies in Indonesia also carried out innovations. Investment features have been introduced by several E-Wallets, such as a feature on OVO where the E- Wallet users can invest in mutual funds directly from the application with simple steps called Investasi. This feature is the result of a collaboration with one of the marketplaces in Indonesia, Bareksa, and an asset management company called Manulife. Investment companies such as Bareksa, Bibit, Ajaib, and others are examples of mutual fund marketplace companies. Mutual Fund Marketplace is a forum for the availability of mutual fund products issued by Investment

(2)

registered with Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK) such as Bibit, Bareksa, Tanamduit, Ajaib, Kelola, etc.

A. Mutual Fund

Mutual funds are a platform used to raise funds from the investor to be further invested in securities portfolios by an investment manager who has obtained permission from Bapepam (Badan Pengawas Pasar Modal dan Lembaga Keuangan). Mutual Funds are a good instrument for novice investors because mutual funds only require little funds and not much time. By adding the collective property funds into various investment objects (portfolios) then the investment risk can be reduced. Mutual funds are also expected can increase the role of local investors to invest in the capital market in Indonesia (Firman and Yasa, 2019). A mutual fund is a collection of investment funds pooled from several different participants and invested for a certain goal. When an investor buys shares in a mutual fund, they become a shareholder of the fund. In order to achieve the fund's objectives and keep shareholders pleased, the fund manager and his team of helpers choose which specific securities (for example, stocks or bonds) they should invest the owners' money in (Tyson, 2012).

B. Perceived Usefulness

Perceived usefulness is a condition in which individuals believe that the use of a particular technology will improve their performance (Shomad, 2012). The measurement of the usefulness construct according to Davis, consists of making work faster, and more useful, increasing productivity, increasing effectiveness, and developing job performance (Fred D.

Davis, 1989). Perceived usefulness, in the opinion of Venkatesh and Davis, is a gauge of a person's level of trust in the application of a system to enhance performance. The information system will be used and vice versa if someone believes in it and finds it valuable. The degree of consumer confidence is also determined by how confident they are in their ability to simplify or make financial transactions more convenient in their daily lives (Venkatesh and Davis, 2000).

C. Perceived Ease of Use

Perceived ease of use is defined as "the situation to which the individual believes to use a particular technology would be simple and easy." This can be deduced from the definition of

"simple," which is "the lack of difficulty or needs to be professional." The amount of effort a person can put out for the many things to which they are engaged is a finite resource.

Researchers believe that a user-friendly program is more likely to be selected by users when all other factors are held constant (Fred D. Davis, 1989). Perceived ease of use relates to how easy it is to operate technology in terms of the amount of physical and mental effort required (Bonn et al., 2016). Perceived ease of use describes a situation in which a person thinks using technology will be easy. The perceived usability of a system affects behavior; the more often technical innovation is employed, the higher the user's perception of the system's usability (Shomad, 2012).

D. Conceptual Framework

This research would like to study two factors: perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, as mentioned in the hypothesis development. These factors would be researched, analyzed, and measured for undergraduate ITB Student investors that do mutual fund investments. These factors would be able to reveal what is the main factor for choosing the mutual fund investing platform.

(3)

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

E. Research Hypothesis

H1: Perceived ease of use has a positive impact towards choosing preferred mutual fund investment platforms.

H2: Perceived usefulness has a positive impact on choosing a preferred mutual fund investment platform.

H3: Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use have a positive impact on choosing a preferred mutual fund investment platform.

2. Methodology

A. Data Collection Method

Questionnaires, interviews, observations, and interviews are just a few examples of data collection methods. This research aims to test hypotheses, analyze data statistically, and get additional information from people who have experience in the field. As a result, the most acceptable type of data gathering for this project is distributing questionnaires to selected people who meet the criteria according to the research issue.

B. Data Analysis Method

The data for this research would be categorized into primary data and secondary data. For the primary data analysis, the researcher will be using regression analysis. The reason for the researcher to use regression analysis is because the relation between two dependent variables (perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use) and the independent variable (preferred investment platform) will be tested. The classical assumption test will be tested for providing an unbiased model. This assumption test consists of three tests, namely the Normality test, Heteroscedasticity test, and Multicollinearity test.

3. Result

A. Respondent Demographics

The demographic of the respondents will be described based on the age range, domicile, faculty, investment duration, investment platform, and type of mutual fund investment owned by the respondents. Based on the results of research that has been done, it shows that the majority of respondents are 20 years old, as many as 31 people (31.00%). While the minority respondents are 18 years old and 23 years old, each of which is 4 people (4.00%).

For the domicile, based on the results of research that has been done show that the majority of respondents answered Bandung as many as 72 people (72.00%). While the minority of respondents answered Tasikmalaya as many as 1 person (1.00%). Furthermore, the majority of the respondent is a student of the School of Business and Management, as many as 73 people

(4)

(73.00%). While the minority of respondents is a student of the School of Pharmacy, as many as 1 person (1.00%).

For the investment duration of respondents, based on the survey it shows that the majority of respondents answered for 1-2 years as many as 49 people (49,00%). While the minority of respondents answered <1 year, as many as 23 people (23.00%). The researcher also ask about the most preferred mutual fund investment platform by respondents, it shows that the majority of respondents answered Bibit, as many as 25 people (25.00%). While the minority of respondents answered E-Wallet, as many as 12 people (12.00%). The majority of respondents preferred investing in balance funds, as many as 30 people (30.00%), and the minority of respondents preferred investing in fixed income funds.

B. Validity Test

This test is used to determine whether each statement item is valid for use in gauging the variables. The Pearson Product Moment correlation method was utilized in this study to assess the reliability of the statement items. If the correlation coefficient value of the statement item being tested is greater than the critical value of 0.3, it can be concluded that the statement item is a valid construct. The following table displays the findings of the questionnaire validity test for the variables examined:

Table 1: Research Variable Validity Test Results Recapitulation

Variable Code Critical Value Description

Perceived Usefulness (PU)

PU1 0.637 Acceptable

Perceived Ease of Use (PEU)

PEU1 0.675 Acceptable

Preferred Investment Platform (PIP)

PIP1 0.778 Acceptable

C. Reliability Test

Once the instrument has been tested for reliability, it is subsequently examined using the Alpha- Cronbach method. If the reliability coefficient is higher than 0.6, the questionnaire is considered to be trustworthy. The reliability test's findings are listed below:

Table 2: Research Questionnaire Reliability Test Results

Variable Reliability Index Description

Perceived Usefulness 0.683 Acceptable

Perceived Ease of Use 0.694 Acceptable

Preferred Investment Platform 0.621 Acceptable

(5)

D. Classical Assumption Test a. Normality Test

The SPSS output obtained the value of Sig. normality test using the Kolmogorov-Smirnovs method is 0.068. Because the p-value is greater than alpha (0.068 > 0.05), it can be concluded that the residual data is normally distributed.

Table 3: Normality Test

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Unstandardized Residual

N 100

Normal Parameters^a,b Mean .0000000

Std. Deviation 1.55585686

Most Extreme Differences Absolute .086

Positive .055

Negative -.086

Test Statistic .086

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .068^c

a. Test distribution is Normal.

b. Created with data.

c. Lilliefors Significance Correction.

b. Heteroscedasticity Test

Figure 2: Heteroscedasticity Test

Figure 2 demonstrates that the dots do not create a pattern and instead spread randomly.

Additionally, there are spots on the Y axis that are dispersed above and below zero. The regression model can be used for further analysis because it can be determined that there is no heteroscedasticity in the regression model.

c. Multicollinearity Test

Based on the table below, it is known that each independent variable's VIF value is less than 10, with the perceived usefulness variable's value being 1.301 and the perceived ease of use variable's value being 1.301. These findings support the hypothesis that the independent variables in the model do not display multicollinearity

(6)

Table 4: Multicollinearity Test Coefficients^a

Model Collinearity Statistics

Tolerance VIF

1 Perceived Usefulness .769 1.301

Perceived Ease of Use .769 1.301

a. Dependent Variable: preferred Investment Platform

E. Multiple Linear Regression Analysis

By using the SPSS program application, the output of the multiple linear regression calculation is obtained as follows:

Based on table 4.28, it can be seen the value of the constants and regression coefficients so that multiple regression equations can be formed as follows:

PIP = 1,402 + 0,274 PU + 0,223 PEU

The above equation can be interpreted as follows:

a = 1,402-it means that if Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use are zero (0), then the preferred Investment Platform will be worth 1,402 units;

β(1) = 0,274-it means that if Perceived Usefulness increases by one unit, then the preferred Investment Platform will increase by 0.274 units.

β(2) = 0,223-meaning that if the Perceived Ease of Use increases by one unit, the preferred Investment Platform will increase by 0.223 units.

F. Coefficient of Determination Analysis

The correlation coefficient's square represents the coefficient of determination (Sugiyono, 2011). The coefficient of determination can be calculated using the following formula:

Table 5: Analysis of the Coefficient of Determination Model Summary^b

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .629^a .395 .383 1.57181

a. Predictors: (Constant), Perceived Ease of Use, Perceived Usefulness b. Dependent Variable: preferred Investment Platform

Thus, based on the coefficient of determination, the preferred investment platform is influenced by Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use by 39.5%, while the remaining 60.5% is influenced by other factors not examined in this study

Coefficients^a

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 1.402 1.087 1.289 .200

Perceived Usefulness .274 .063 .393 4.360 .000

Perceived Ease of Use .223 .060 .337 3.740 .000

(7)

G. Simultaneous Hypothesis Testing

A simultaneous hypothesis test is one that seeks to ascertain whether all of the independent variable's factors together have a substantial or insignificant impact on the dependent variable.

Hypothesis:

H0: Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) have no significant effect on the Preferred Investment Platform (PIP);

H1: Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) have a significant effect on the Preferred Investment Platform (PIP).

Test Criteria:

If Sig. ≤ 0.05, reject H0 and accept H1; or If Sig. > 0.05, accept H0 dan reject H1.

Table 6: Simultaneous Hypothesis Testing ANOVA^a

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 156.476 2 78.238 31.668 .000^b

Residual 239.648 97 2.471

Total 396.125 99

b. Predictors: (Constant), Perceived Ease of Use, Perceived Usefulness

Table 6 describe that the F value is 31,668 with a p-value (sig) of 0.000. Because the value of Sig. is less than 0.05, then H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted, meaning that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use variables have a significant effect on the preferred investment platform.

H. Partial Hypothesis Testing

The results of the partial test calculation are as follows:

Table 6: Simultaneous Hypothesis Testing

a) Partial hypothesis testing of Perceived Usefulness (PU) Variables on Preffered Investment Platform (PIP)

H0: Perceived Usefulness (PU) does not have a significant positive effect on the Preferred Investment Platform (PIP);

H1: Perceived Usefulness (PU) does have a significant positive effect on the Preferred Investment Platform (PIP).

Test Criteria:

Coefficients^a

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 1.402 1.087 1.289 .200

Perceived Usefulness .274 .063 .393 4.360 .000

Perceived Ease of Use .223 .060 .337 3.740 .000

(8)

Based on the existing test criteria and table 4.34, it can be seen that the value of Sig. Perceived Usefulness (PU) is in the H_0 rejection area because it is below 0.05. The Unstandardized and Standardized coefficients are positive, this indicates that there is a positive influence between Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Preferred Investment Platform (PIP). Therefore, H_0 is rejected and H_1 is accepted, where Perceived Usefulness (PU) does have a significant positive effect on the Preferred Investment Platform (PIP).

b) Partial hypothesis testing of Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) Variables on Preferred Investment Platform (PIP)

H0: Perceived Usefulness (EPU) does not have a significant positive effect on the Preferred Investment Platform (PIP);

H1: Perceived Usefulness (PEU) does have a significant positive effect on the Preferred Investment Platform (PIP).

Test Criteria:

Based on the existing test criteria and table 4.34, it can be seen that the value of Sig. Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) is in the H_0 rejection area because it is below 0.05. The Unstandardized and Standardized coefficients are positive, this indicates that there is a positive influence between Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Preferred Investment Platform (PIP). Therefore, H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted, where Perceived Usefulness (PU) does has a significant positive effect on the Preferred Investment Platform (PIP).

4. Discussion

Based on the research hypothesis that was already stated in the introduction, hypothesis one stated that perceived ease of use has a positive impact on choosing preferred mutual fund investment platforms. From the research that has been carried out in chapter 3, it was found that Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) has a positive and significant influence on Preferred Investment Platform (PIP). Therefore, the researcher concludes that hypothesis one is considered valid. This finding supports Pratama and Suputra (2019) research about electronic money. In the research, it stated that if the respondent believes that the information system is easy to use, then he will use it. Respondents also felt that electronic money was easy to learn, easy to use, easy to understand, and easy to become skilled at.

Hypothesis two stated that perceived usefulness has a positive impact on choosing preferred mutual fund investment platforms. From the research that has been carried out in chapter 3, it was found that Perceived Usefulness (PU) has a positive and significant influence on Preferred Investment Platform (PIP). Therefore, the researcher concludes that hypothesis two is considered valid. This finding support Safitri and Diana (2020) research about electronic money platform. The research concludes that the perceived usefulness variable has a positive and significant effect on the variable of interest in choosing an electronic wallet. Based on the research sample, these findings indicate that the research sample, especially those who use electronic wallets, feel very good trust in the use of electronic wallets, which is measured by completing financial transaction payments that are faster, more efficient, easier, and can control transaction activities according to the indicator’s provided researchers have distributed.

Hypothesis number three claimed that picking a preferred mutual fund investment platform is positively influenced by perceived usefulness and considered perceived ease of use. Perceived

(9)

Usefulness (PU) and Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) have a favourable and significant influence on Preferred Investment Platform (PIP), according to the research presented in Chapter 3. As a result, the researcher comes to the conclusion that hypothesis three is reliable. Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) influence undergraduate ITB students' choice of mutual fund investment platform by 39.5 percent, according to the coefficient of determination analysis; the remaining 60.5 percent is influenced by other factors not considered in this study

5. Conclusion

The researcher came to conclusions based on the study's specified research purpose, data analysis, and other factors. First, it was determined that perceived usefulness and ease of use have a positive and significant influence on undergraduate ITB students' preferences for mutual fund investment platforms. This finding satisfied the first research purpose. The second conclusion fulfilled the second research objective and concluded that the majority of undergraduate ITB students preferred investing in mutual funds on mutual funds marketplaces such as Bibit, Bareksa, Ipot, and Ajaib. Moreover, the majority of undergraduate ITB students’

preferred mutual funds type is balance funds.

References

Bonn, M. A. et al. (2016). Purchasing Wine Online: The Effects of Social Influence, Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and Wine Involvement. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, 25(7), pp. 841–869. doi: 10.1080/19368623.2016.111 5382.

Bosamia, M., & Patel, D. (2018). Past to Present Overview of Mobile Wallet Payments Architectures to Compare and Identify Overall Participants. International Journal of Computer Applications, 179(48), pp. 10–18. doi: 10.5120/ijca2018917227.

Etikan, I. (2016). Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), p. 1. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.201605 01.11.

Firman, A. O. A., & Yasa, G. W. (2019). Analisis Komparatif Kinerja Reksadana Konvensional dan Syariah pada Periode Krisis dan Non Krisis. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 28(1), pp. 590–612.

Fred D. Davis (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), pp. 319–340.

Mashabi, M., & Wasiaturrahma, W. (2021). Electronic Based Payment Systems and Economic Growth in Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmu Ekonomi Terapan, 6(1), p. 97. doi:

10.20473/jiet.v6 i1.26287.

Gu, J.C., Lee, S.C. & Suh, Y.H. (2009). Determinants of Behavioral Intention to Mobile Banking. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, pp.11605-11616.

Nur Ismail, A. R. et al. (2021). Investasi Digital Sebagai Solusi Mengurangi Perilaku Konsumtif Milenial Masa Pandemi Covid-19. CAPITAL: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Manajemen, 4(2), p. 125. doi: 10.25273/capital.v4i2.8742.

Omarini, A. E. (2018). Fintech and the future of the payment landscape: The mobile wallet ecosystem - A challenge for retail banks?. International Journal of Financial Research, 9(4), pp. 97–116. doi: 10.5430/ijfr.v9n4p97.

Pikkarainen, T. et al. (2004). Consumer Acceptance of Online Banking: an extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Internet Research, 14(3), pp.224-235.

(10)

Pratama, A. B., & Suputra, I. D. G. D. (2019). Pengaruh Persepsi Manfaat, Persepsi Kemudahan Penggunaan, dan Tingkat Kepercayaan Pada Minat Menggunakan Uang Elektronik. E-Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana, 27, pp. 927–953. doi:

EJA.2019.v27.i02.p04.

Safitri, D. D., & Diana, N. (2020). Pengaruh Persepsi Kegunaan Dan Persepsi Kemudahaan Pengguna Pada Minat Penggunaan Dompet Elektronik (OVO) Dalam Transaksi Keuangan. E-Jra, 09(05), pp. 92– 107.

Shomad, A. C. (2012). Kemudahan, dan Persepsi Risiko Terhadap Perilaku Penggunaan E- Commerce. Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa FEB Universitas Brawijaya, 1(2), pp. 1–20.

Sugiyono (2011). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Penerbit Alfabeta.

Supangat, A. (2007). Statistika Dalam Kajian Deskriptif, Inferensial, dan Nonparametik, Edisi Pertama, Jakarta: Kencana

Tyson, E. (2012) Personal Finance for Dummies, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). Theoretical extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), pp. 186–204.

doi: 10.1287/ mnsc.46.2.186.11926.