Data Profile

Before proceeding with statistical analysis it is important to check that the data does not violate any of the assumptions made by the individual tests (Pallant, 2013). This means obtaining descriptive statistics on your variables: mean, standard deviation, range of scores, skewness and kurtosis. There are 101 valid responses from 104 separate attempts of the questionnaire.

7.3.1 Demographic Analysis

Gender
		Frequency	Percent
Valid	Male	87	86.1
	Female	14	13.9
	Total	101	100.0

Table 5: Gender Frequency

Questionnaire participants were sought from Bitcoin communities through social media websites. Individuals were targeted when they themselves posted “#Bitcoin” thus flagging and identifying themselves as users. This self-elected act was followed up in an indiscriminate method of contact. Therefore the discrepancy in frequency of gender participating in research is an accurate reflection of the Bitcoin population willing to share their views. It is postulated that the overall Bitcoin population may be subject to the gender differences in technology acceptance (Gefen & Straub, 1997).

Age Range
		Frequency	Percent
Valid	15-24	19	18.8
	25-34	47	46.5
	35-44	26	25.7
	45-55	6	5.9
	55+	3	3.0
	Total	101	100.0

Table 6: Age Range Frequency

All questionnaires were delivered to participants in the same fashion thus the range within the responses which show a majority 46.5% of respondents 25-34 years old is a reflection of how each and technology acceptance are somewhat inversely proportional (Porter & Donthu, 2006). Despite this relationship it can be seen that the youngest group 15-24 years only has an 18.8% response, this could be due to the lack of disposable income in younger people therefore a reduced prevalence in the Bitcoin community.

Highest level of education attained
		Frequency	Percent
Valid	High School Diploma	29	28.7
	Bachelors Degree	29	28.7
	Masters Degree	33	32.7
	Ph.D	6	5.9
	Other	4	4.0
	Total	101	100.0

Table 7: Highest Education Attained Frequency

The highest level of education attained by the respondents show are roughly equal distribution between high school, bachelor’s, and master’s degree levels, and perhaps reflects the equality offered by Bitcoin even in this first adopters stage. Yet it is uncertain of the reason for reduced number of Ph.D. holder users. This may be indicative of the reduced number of doctorates in the population in the first instance when compared to high school diploma holders. Further research may be performed to investigate this distribution.

Avg. hours on internet
		Frequency	Percent
Valid	<1 hour	4	4.0
	1-3 hour (s)	10	9.9
	3-5 hours	22	21.8
	6-9 hours	38	37.6
	9 hours+	27	26.7
	Total	101	100.0

Table 8: Average hours on Internet Daily

The questionnaire conducted in English was open on the World Wide Web and a spread every continent although the majority of continents were underrepresented with Central America, South America, Africa, Asia, and Australasia respondents totalling only 12%. The vast majority of respondents derived from Europe and North America. It is therefore possible that the first adopters in the Bitcoin community come from these areas or the language of the questionnaire limited its exposure.

Next section: https://jl00282.wordpress.com/dissertation-part-2/customers-perspective/quantitative-findings-analysis-disscussion/normality-analysis-sample-size/