Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 2021, 32(5), 433–445

The Role of Entrepreneurial Intentions, Perceived Risk and Perceived Trust in

Crowdfunding Intentions
Mina Fanea-Ivanovici1, Hasnan Baber2*
1
Department of Economics and Economic Policies, Bucharest University of Economic Studies
6 Piata Romana, District 1, Bucharest, 010372, Romania
E-mail. [email protected],
2
Endicott College of International Studies, Woosong University
Daejeon-34606, South Korea
E-mail. [email protected]; *corresponding author

http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.32.5.29300

Crowdfunding is a new financial and marketing tool, which is used to raise money for new projects and to promote innovative
products. The aim of this paper is to investigate the influencing factors of crowdfunding intentions among students as future
or current entrepreneurs. Drawing from the Theory of Planned Behaviour and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use
of Technology, we analyse the data from two culturally and entrepreneurship-wise different countries, Romania and South
Korea using PLS-SEM (N=441). Entrepreneurial intentions, perceived risk and perceived trust are found to positively in-
fluence crowdfunding intentions among business, economics and management students in both countries. We further check
the influence of attitude towards entreprenurship, social norms and perceived behavioural control, entrepreneurial educa-
tion and desire for success on entre-preneurial intentions, and report positive correlations for the whole analyzed sample.
Moreover, social influence and facilitating conditions positively influence the entrepreneurs’ perceived risk, and effort ex-
pectancy and performance expectancy positively influence perceived trust. Whereas the Romanian sample does not exhibit
any influence of social norms on entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurial education is not correlated with entrepreneurial
intentions in South Korea.

Keywords: Crowdfunding; Entrepreneurial Intentions; Theory of Planned Behavior; Entrepreneurial Education; Perceived
Risk; Perceived Trust; Romania; South Korea;

Introduction Vismara (2018) suggested that services offered by crowd-

funding platforms do influence the annual number of suc-
Crowdfunding (CF) has recently developed due to the cessful campaigns and particluraly post-campaign services.
rising market needs for alternative finance, on the one hand, However, creating a proper legal framework, addressing as-
and to legislators’ efforts to accommodate this new financ- sociated risks and enhancing trust, without considering the
ing tool, on the other hand. The US opened the gate in terms entrepreneurial intention (EI) are not enough to spur CF use
of CF enactment through the JOBS Act in 2012. Later on, for business development. Smith et al. (2019) stated that an
other developed economies created the adequate legal entrepreneur is an individual who establishes and manages
framework for CF operation (Kuselias, 2020). Recently, the a business for profit and growth. Entrepreneurship is a
EU has adopted the Regulation on European Crowdfunding broader term than the mere establishment of a business (Jena,
Service Providers (ECSP) for business (European Commis- 2020). It is series of cognitive and behavioural processes,
sion, n.d.). Inter alia, it requires “clear rules on information which starts with the intention to be an entrepreneur. Inten-
disclosures for project owners and crowdfunding platforms” tion to pursue any action or activity is a prerequisite for any
and “rules on governance and risk management for crowd- behaviour. As described by Moriano et al. (2012, p. 165),
funding platforms.” Despite the large variations in legal EI is the “conscious state of mind” preceding the actual
frameworks, mitigating risk and fostering trust (Schwien- business action or behavior. EI develops over time through
bacher, 2019; Stemler, 2020) have been a constant market personal traits, external influences and education. Entrepre-
concern and at the very core of initiatives aimed to bolster neurial education has a strong influence on students and
crowdfunding intention (CI) and behavior. That is because shapes their intention to choose entrepreneurship as a career
backers and entrepreneurs are exposed to risks associated (Wei et al., 2019). This is because entrepreneurial education
with lending, borrowing and equity. Success in raising funds not only creates a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship,
depends on the perceived trust and risk linked with the plat- but also helps to take decisions that can improve the perfor-
form from both market sides. Islam and Khan (2019) have mance of the business (Ho et al., 2018). Intention models,
investigated the role of social influence, facilitating condi- along with the other additional influences of individual
tions, effort expectancy and performance expectancy on the characteristics, such as desire for success, help to under-
perceived risk and trust related to CF use. Rossi and stand the direct antecedents of intention to start a business

-433-
 Mina Fanea-Ivanovici, Hasnan Baber. The Role of Entrepreneurial Intentions, Perceived Risk and Perceived Trust in…

(Esfandiar et al., 2019). Krueger et al. (2000) stated that, of et al. (2018) found a significant correlation in both Europe
all intention theories, the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and Asia. Paul et al. (2017) and Shinnar et al. (2012) postu-
is the most preferred model to examine entrepreneurial in- lated that country culture, which actually stands for SNs, is
tentions, as it offers a coherent structure that provides in- a significant predictor of EIs. Nevertheless, the study con-
sights into understanding and predicting entrepreneurial in- ducted by Esfandiar et al. (2019) and Perez-Fernandez et al.
tention. According to this theory, behavioral intentions de- (2020) did not identify a significant correlation between the
pend on attitudes towards the behavior, social norms (SNs) two variables.Perceived behavioral control (PBC), or else
and perceived behavioral control (PBC) (Azjen, 1991). Var- referred to as self-efficacy or feasibility, is yet another
ious valuable studies have applied TPB to investigate the strong explanatory variable of EIs (Al-Jubari et al., 2019;
entrepreneurial intention among university students (Al- Fragoso et al., 2020; Munir et al., 2019) or a weaker one
Jubari et al. 2018; Fragoso et al., 2020; Laguia et al., (Esfandiar et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2019). A positive sig-
2019).We hereby aim to analyze the influence of perceived nificant correlation has been found by Khusheed et al. (2018)
risk, perceived trust and EIs on CI in business and econom- in both Europe and Asia, while fear of failure in business
ics students in Romania and South Korea. The two countries was found to be a negative, but insignificant factor. Similar
exhibit different stages of entrepreneurship development: results were reported by Bauboniene et al. (2018), who
South Korea is innovation-driven, whereas Romania is op- found that students do not consider it an issue if they fail in
portunity driven, according to Roibu and Roibu (2016). En- business. Therefore, we formulate the following hypotheses
trepreneurial intentions are then checked with the TPB com- pertaining to the TPB:
ponents, entrepreneurial education and desire for success, H1: Attitude towards entrepreneurship has a positive
whereas perceived trust will be checked with social influ- influence on EIs.
ence and facilitating conditions, and perceived risk with ef- H2: SNs have a positive influence on EIs.
fort expectancy and performance expectancy, which were H3: PBC has a positive influence on EIs.
taken from the unified theory of acceptance and use of tech-
nology (UTAUT) (Venkantesh et al., 2003). The findings of Entrepreneurial Education and EIs
the study benefit both universities and academic curricula, The relationship between entrepreneurial education and
in their endeavor to become more entrepreneurial and mar- EIs has been the object of extensive research. Altogether,
ket-oriented, as well as platform owners, in order to better studies indicate ‘a significant but small correlation between
assess their functionalities so as to attract a larger number of entrepreneurial education and EIs’ (Bae et al., 2014). Most
entrepreneurs and investors, and to create an appealing and studies have concluded that there is a positive correlation
trustworthy image. between entrepreneurial education and EIs (Jones et al.,
2008; Bauboniene et al., 2018; Gieure et al., 2019;
Literature Review and Hypothesis Development Ndofirepi, 2020; Nguyen et al., 2019; Wegner et al., 2020).
Theory of Planned Behaviour and Entrepreneurial While Gieure et al. (2019) argued that specialised education
Intentions (EIs) and training lead to EIs and university activities influence
students’ entrepreneurial mindset in this respect, Karimi et
Attitudes towards behaviour, the first antecedent of in- al. (2016) surprinsingly reached the conclusion that
tention, refer to ‘the degree to which a person has a favour- entrepreneurial education programmes have no significant
able or unfavourable evaluation or appraisal of the behav- effect on students’ EIs. Other researchers (Fayolle & Gailly,
iour in question’ (Ajzen, 1991, p. 188), SNs refer to ‘the 2015) look at the impact of entrepreneurial education on EIs
perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform the through the lens of previous exposure to entrepreneurship
behaviour’ (Ajzen, 1991, p. 188), and PBC is ‘the perceived and find that it has a stronger impact on unexposed students
ease or difficulty of performing the behaviour’ (Ajzen, 1991, than on students with some sort of entrepreneurship
p. 188) and it reflects previous experience and anticipated experience. Based on the extant literature, we formulate the
barriers. Various studies have investigated EI among the following hypothesis:
youths or students drawing on the TPB. Munir et al. (2019)
H4: EE has a positive influence on EI.
concluded that the TPB components have a stronger explan-
atory power in emerging economies than in developed econ- Desire for Success and EI
omies.Al-Jubari et al. (2019), Fragoso et al. (2020), Gieure
Desire for success has been investigated and found to
et al. 2019, Munir et al., (2019), Nguyen et al. (2019) and
have a strong impact on entrepreneurial intentions among
Rodrigues et al. (2021) have found that there is a positive
youths (Nguyen et al., 2019). Similar explanatory factors in
relationship between attitudes towards entrepreneurship or
the academic environment, such as learning orientation and
image of entrepreneurship (Bauboniene et al., 2018) and EIs. passion for work, are conducive to desirability
In addition, Esfandiar et al. (2019) proved that desirability considerations that form EIs (De Clercq et al., 2013). While
for this activity is a moderate influencing factor. However,
some studies indicate that personality traits, as is motivation
others studies contradict these findings, and argue that atti-
to achieve, affect EIs more than other factors (Espiritu-
tudes towards entrepreneurship cannot explain EIs in collec-
Olmos and Sastre-Castillo, 2015), others showcase that
tivist societies (Siu and Lo, 2011). Social norms (SNs), or
personality traits have been tested to be poor predictors of
the feedback from the relevant others, were found to have a EIs (Krueger et al., 2000). Given these conflicting views
positive influence on EIs (Al-Jubari et al., 2019; Gieure et and conclusions, we set forth the following hypothesis
al., 2019; Meoli et al., 2020; Munir et al., 2019). Baubon-
within our proposed model:
iene et al. (2018) tested the influence of SNs on EIs for Eu-
rope, and found a positive weak correlation, and Khusheed

- 434 -
 Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 2021, 32(5), 433–445

H5: Desire for success has a positive influence on EI. and trustworthiness (Moon & Hwang, 2018). Furthermore,
UTAUT and Perceived Risk and Trust elements such as design, content, easiness of navigation,
security, customer feedback, reliability, integrity could
Previous studies have investigated the influence of the explain perceived trust or risk that further influence CI
UTAUT factors in the digital entrepreneurial environment (Busse, 2019). Trust forms a main ingredient in the receipe
(Kim & Hall, 2020). Social influence is ‘the degree to which of crowdfunding campaigns from either sides (backers and
an individual perceives that important others believe he or project owners) (Hossain & Oparaocha, 2017). Extant
she would use the new system’ (Venkantesh et al., 2003, p. studies reveal that perceived trust significantly explains CI
451), facilitating conditions refer to ‘the degree to which an (Kim et al., 2019, Kim et al., 2020; Moon & Hwang, 2018;
individual believes that an organizational or technical Rodriguez-Ricardo et al., 2019; Yang et al., 2019; Baber &
infrastructure exists to support use of the system’ Fanea-Ivanovici, 2021). As for perceived risk, it was found to
(Venkantesh et al., 2003, p. 452), effort expectancy reflects have a positive influence on CI (Zhao et al., 2017) or, on the
‘the degree of ease associated with the use of the system contrary, to have no significant influence on CI (Kim et al.,
(Venkantesh et al., 2003, p. 450), and performance 2019). The largest majority of studies having investigated
expectancy reflects ‘the degree to which an individual perceived risk and trust have done this from the perspective
believes that using the system will help him or her to attain of backers/financiers CI (Steigenberger, 2017), and not from
gains in job performance’ (Venkantesh et al., 2003, p. 447). the perspective of future entrepreneurs’ standpoint. Therefore,
Thies et al. (2016) investigated the role of social the present study aims to address this gap of knowledge by
influence on consumer decision making, while San Martin proposing the following two hypotheses:
et al. (2021) identified that social consciousness and
platform risk determine overall attitude towards CF. H10: Perceived risk has a positive influence on CI
Moreover, social influence is positively associated with CF H11: Perceived trust has a positive influence on CI
success (Shneor et al., 2021). Moon and Hwang (2018) EIs and CI
showed that CF intention is influenced by social influence,
effort expectancy and perceived trust, and the same Although less explored, the assumption that there is a
variables, along with performance expectancy and positive correaltion between EIs and CI among students was
facilitating conditions are credited with influence power by dealt with by Baber (2022), and it was validated. The
Islam and Khan (2021). connections between EIs and CI were analysed in the
In mobile payment, performance expectancy influences qualitative research conducted by Busse (2018). The study
consumer behaviour, whereas social influence and proposes that entrepreneurial action is followed by CF
facilitating conditions have a significant impact on intention action in order ‘to boost their early stage level into the next
to use (Patil et al., 2020). On a similar note, Slade et al. one’ (Busse, 2018, p. 306). In other words, the sequence
(2015) concluded that performance expectancy, social EIs-CI is hereby discussed. In the same line of thought, we
influence and perceived risk have a strong impact on non- will check the following hypothesis:
users to adopt this technology. Relationships have been H12: EIs have a positive influence on CI .
discovered between perceived trust, effort expectancy,
performance expectancy, social influence and facilitating Method
conditions, and m-commerce adoption (Chong, 2013). Risk
and trust influence on effort expectancy and performance Research Context
expectancy were proved in NFC based mobile payment The sample of data was collected from two countries,
(Khalilzadeh et al., 2017). Romania and South Korea. This research builds on previous
Due to the still unexplored correlations between the research comparing the two countries in terms of entrepre-
UTAUT components, on one hand, and perceived risk and neurship (Roibu & Roibu, 2016). The sample consists of
perceived trust, on the other hand, we will test the following university students studying management, economics and
four hypotheses within the proposed model: business programmes. The students of these programs usu-
H6: Social influence has a positive influence on ally have an affinity towards entrepreneurship and acquire
perceived risk. the required skills to operate the enterprise. There is a dif-
H7: Facilitating conditions have a positive influence on ference in the entrepreneurial disposition and intentions
perceived risk. among the Asian and European students as suggested by
H8: Effort expectancy has a positive influence on Giacomin et al. (2011). The countries from these two re-
perceived trust. gions were selected based on convenience sampling and the
H9: Performance expectancy has a positive influence on data was collected through a snowball sampling approach.
perceived trust. Similar two-staged sampling was used by the previous stud-
ies of Baber & Fanea-Ivanovici, (2021) and Bewley et al.
Perceived Risk, Perceived Trust and CI
(2014). The survey link was shared with students in online
According to the trust theory, CI is influenced, inter alia, zoom meetings, by mail and the learning management sys-
by trust in the platform (Kang et al., 2016; Zheng et al., tem (LMS). The students were instructed to share this link
2016). Platform features that could instill trust or distrust with their friends and students in other courses. Further, a
refer to financial transparency and data privacy (Boeuf et al, description was written in the beginning of survey to en-
2014), the sufficiency of information provided throughout courage students to share this link in their professional net-
the campaign (Fanea-Ivanovici, 2018), platform expertise work to create a snowball effect. Participation in the survey

- 435 -
 Mina Fanea-Ivanovici, Hasnan Baber. The Role of Entrepreneurial Intentions, Perceived Risk and Perceived Trust in…

was voluntary, anonymous, and no private data was col- respondents were from the age group 18–21 (59 %), fol-
lected, in compliance with the applicable General Data Pro- lowed by the 22–25 age group (32 %) and the rest (9 %)
tection Regulation (GDPR) regulations. The data was col- were above 27 years of age. Students were asked if they
lected through an English administrated questionnaire as have any family or personal business experience. Around 34
students were studying in international colleges. Sample % of the students said they had, and out of those, 20 % had
A total sample size of 441 was collected from both less than 1 year of experience in handling the business and
countries - Romania (224) and South Korea (217). Interest- 12 % had between 1–5 years. The sample (16 %) had some
ingly, females were in majority (51 %), 48 % were males experience in raising funds or backing a project in CF as
and 1 % preferred not to disclose their gender. Most of the shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Demographic Characteristics
Romania South Korea Total
Characteristic Options n=224 %age n=217 %age n=441 %age
Female 134 59.82 % 94 43.32 % 229 51.84 %
Gender Male 88 39.29 % 123 56.68 % 211 47.93 %
Others 2 0.89 % 0 0.00 % 2 0.46 %
18-21 165 73.66 % 96 44.24 % 262 59.35 %
Age 22-25 43 19.20 % 98 45.16 % 141 32.02 %
26 and above 16 7.14 % 23 10.60 % 39 8.86 %
With business experience, of which: 81 36.16 % 68 31.34 % 149 33.87 %
Less than 1 year experience 53 23.66 % 34 15.67% 87 19.78 %
1-5 years experience 22 9.82 % 30 13.82 % 52 11.81 %
Business Experience
6-10 years experience 3 1.34 % 2 0.92 % 5 1.14 %
More than 10 years experience 3 1.34 % 2 0.92 % 5 1.14 %
Without business experience 143 63.84 % 149 68.66 % 293 66.36 %
Crowdfunding Yes 42 18.75 % 29 13.36 % 71 16.14 %
Experience No 182 81.25 % 188 86.64 % 371 84.08 %

Measures factor) is examined. If the VIF is 5.0 or lower, then data

is not suffering from multicollinearity problem (Hair et al.,
The items of constructs were taken from past studies as 2019). All the values of VIF are below 5 (see Table 2). The
shown in Table 2. The data was analysed using the Partial square root of all values of AVEs is higher than the correla-
Least Square structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) ap- tion between constructs; therefore, divergent validity is es-
proach through SmartPLS 3.2 software. PLS-SEM is useful tablished (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) as shown in appendix
in the earlier phases of theory development, it helps in ex- A. To further confirm the divergent validity, the HTMT ra-
ploration and theory development, it is convenient for test- tio of correlations is evaluated. The divergent validity was
ing a research framework where it is important to test the established again as all values are below the acceptable
dependencies of the variable, predict the dependent variable, maximum value threshold of 0.85 (Henseler et al., 2015).
and where the structure is complex and data may lack nor-
mality (Hair Jr et al., 2020). The estimates of factor loading
for each item in a construct and reliability of constructs are
shown in Table 2. Factor loadings for all items exceed the
minimum 0.70 thresholds. The loading value of PBC3 is
slightly less than 0.7, therefore it can be accepted.
Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability criteria were
used to evaluate the reliability of the data, and were con-
firmed as the values of both assessing criteria were above
0.7 (Hair et al., 2019). The construct ‘desire for success’ has
an alpha value little less than 0.7, but the composite reliabil-
ity value was 0.823, hence reliability will be established. To
measure the convergent validity, AVE (average variance ex-
tracted) values were assessed. The values of AVE must ex-
ceed 0.5 minimum acceptable levels (Hair et al., 2019) as
confirmed in Table 2, thus confirming that each item
measures its corresponding construct. For assessing the di-
vergent validity of the items, which implies two latent vari-
ables that are theorized to be different are also actually sta-
tistically different, Fornell-Larcker criteria were employed.
To check the multicollinearity issue, VIF (variance inflation

- 436 -
 Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 2021, 32(5), 433–445
1

Table 2
Internal Consistency and Measurement of Reflective Constructs Across Contexts
Construct/ Factor Romania (n=224) South Korea (n=217)
VIF
Items* Loading** Mean Std. dev Mean Std. dev f-value
Attitude toward entrepreneurship (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.894; CR=0.926; AVE=0.758) (Nguyen et al., 2019)
ATT1 0.898 2.962 3.82 1.056 3.88 1.000 .418
ATT2 0.93 3.639 3.78 1.025 3.84 1.015 .408
ATT3 0.898 2.807 3.95 1.083 3.96 1.009 .028
ATT4 0.744 1.753 3.73 1.002 3.79 1.066 .377
Social norms (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.884; CR=0.930; AVE=0.812) (Farrukh et al., 2019)
SN1 0.925 2.91 3.74 .901 3.70 .991 .252***
SN2 0.89 2.41 3.88 .965 3.82 1.048 .324**
SN3 0.888 2.383 3.59 .899 3.59 .920 .010
Perceived behavioral control (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.738; CR=0.839; AVE=0.637) (Nguyen et al., 2019)
PBC1 0.922 1.537 3.04 1.008 3.09 .991 .298
PBC3 0.69 1.369 3.42 .805 3.45 .833 .218
PBC4 0.765 1.531 3.54 .763 3.55 .854 .050
Entrepreneurial education (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.816; CR=0.876; AVE=0.638) (Nguyen et al., 2019)
EED1 0.779 1.697 4.02 .952 4.11 1.048 .947
EED2 0.833 1.561 4.06 .784 4.11 .868 .305
EED3 0.783 1.84 3.78 .980 3.84 1.039 .357
EED4 0.798 1.938 4.01 .844 4.16 .859 3.325***
Desire for success (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.681; CR=0.823; AVE=0.608) (Mhango, 2006)
DFS1 0.843 1.401 4.05 .866 4.09 .906 .162
DFS4 0.732 1.34 4.27 .613 4.24 .707 .141
DFS6 0.76 1.266 3.78 .884 3.94 .885 3.762***
Entrepreneurial intentions (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.927; CR=0.943; AVE=0.732) (Linan & Chen, 2009)
EI1 0.805 2.434 3.35 1.039 3.41 1.015 .400
EI2 0.869 3.003 3.46 1.079 3.52 1.081 .254
EI3R 0.838 2.63 3.78 1.048 3.86 .929 .724
EI4 0.9 4.032 3.88 .976 3.88 .920 .003
EI5 0.868 3.564 3.75 1.041 3.77 1.019 .024
EI6R 0.852 2.747 3.79 .973 3.85 .981 .385
Social Influence (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.801; CR=0.883; AVE=0.716) (Kim & Hall, 2020)
SIN1 0.863 1.897 3.04 .792 2.90 .855 3.057
SIN2 0.865 1.987 3.17 .862 2.95 .851 7.295
SIN3 0.808 1.504 3.34 .843 3.28 .833 .616
Facilitating Conditions (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.816; CR=0.879; AVE=0.644) (Islam & Khan, 2021)
FC1 0.843 1.831 3.32 .777 3.31 .729 .003
FC2 0.83 1.929 3.45 .756 3.44 .725 .003
FC3 0.781 1.611 3.46 .780 3.41 .722 .321
FC4 0.754 1.517 3.53 .769 3.51 .758 .044
Effort Expectancy (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.815; CR=0.878; AVE=0.643) (Kim & Hall, 2020)
EE1 0.757 1.47 3.42 .705 3.37 .783 .612
EE2 0.832 1.984 3.33 .797 3.32 .802 .026
EE3 0.817 1.7 3.41 .740 3.31 .841 1.520
EE4 0.8 1.901 3.39 .785 3.32 .773 1.018
Performance Expectancy (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.819; CR=0.892; AVE=0.733) (Moon & Hwang, 2018)
PE1 0.863 1.832 3.67 .774 3.66 .835 .006
PE2 0.828 1.775 3.60 .733 3.58 .742 .100
PE3 0.877 1.866 3.63 .709 3.64 .811 .023
Perceived Risk (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.710; CR=0.837; AVE=0.632) (Islam & Khan, 2021)
PR1 0.769 1.417 3.13 .902 3.18 .885 .288
PR2 0.824 1.49 3.17 .808 3.26 .810 1.318
PR3 0.791 1.308 2.98 .828 3.00 .874 .048
Perceived Trust (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.749; CR=0.856; AVE=0.667) (Moon & Hwang, 2018)
PT1 0.866 1.792 3.23 .773 3.23 .812 .001
PT2 0.878 1.795 3.31 .709 3.35 .803 .274
PT3 0.694 1.285 3.20 .815 3.28 .769 1.129
Crowdfunding Intentions (Cronbach’s Alpha=0.881; CR=0.926; AVE=0.807) (Baber, 2020)
BICF1 0.898 2.463 3.19 .853 3.08 .909 1.553
BICF2 0.915 2.817 3.20 .883 3.08 .849 2.205
BICF3 0.883 2.239 3.10 .893 2.98 .935 1.940
Note. CR=Composite reliability; AVE =average variance extracted; VIF = variance inflation factor; Std. dev= standard deviation;
*Items of the construct are shown in appendix A; **p<0.05; ***p<0.10.

- 437 -
 Mina Fanea-Ivanovici, Hasnan Baber. The Role of Entrepreneurial Intentions, Perceived Risk and Perceived Trust in…

Results The R2 values of perceived risk, perceived trust, entrepre-

neurial intentions and crowdfunding intentions are 0.324,
The Structural Model
0.278, 0.404 and 0.308, respectively, which implies the var-
After the measurement model was estimated, the struc- iance in these constructs is reasonably explained by the pre-
tural model was also assessed. In PLS-SEM, the goodness- dicting constructs, as shown in Figure 1. Apart from the
of-fit of the estimated model is evaluated by assessing good- above-suggested model fit indices, we also conducted a fit-
ness-of-fit indices through beta (β), P-values, effect sizes ness of the structural model using Amos v22. Various indi-
(f2), and R2, as suggested by Hair et al. (2020). The struc- ces, e.g. Chi-square, Goodness-of-fit index (GFI), Adjusted
tural model specifies the causal relationships between con- Goodness-of-fit index (AGFI), Comparative Fit Index
structs in the model (Hair Jr et al., 2020), which is shown in (CFI), Root mean square residuals (RMSR), Root mean
Table 3 along with effect sizes (f2). Lately, Henseler et al. square error of approximation (RMSEA), TLI (Tucker
(2016b) suggested using the standardized root mean square Lewis Index), and Parsimony normed fit index (PNFI), were
residual (SRMR) as the only theoretical model fit criterion. considered. The measured values of fit indices have re-
SRMR value of this study is 0.051, which is ≤ 0.1 and vealed the good structural model fit to the data for the pro-
treated as satisfactory for PLS path models (Kock, 2020). posed research model in this study as shown in Table 3.
Table 3
Goodness-of-fit Estimation
Fit index χ2/df GFI AGFI CFI RMSR RMSEA TLI PNFI
Recommended value (Hair et al., 2010) <3 >0.85 >0.80 >0.90 <0.10 <0.08 >0.90 >0.60
Structural model 1.954 .851 .830 .915 .055 .047 .907 .769

Testing Hypotheses
The significance of the model was estimated based on hypothesize the indirect or mediating relationships,
path coefficients (β), T values, P-values, and f 2. All our however, it will be interesting to see the mediating role of
hypotheses (H1-H12) are supported by the results reported EI, perceived risk and perceived trust on the crowdfunding
in Table 4. There is a negative significant relationship intentions. All the factors mentioned are playing a
between PBC and EIs (H4), which is contradicting our significant mediating role except PBC on CI, as shown in
supposed hypothesis to be positive. Although we did not Table 4.
Table 4
Estimation of Path Relationships
H# Direct Relationships β T- Values P Values F2 Remarks
H1 Attitude  EI 0.254 5.33 0.000 0.084 Supported
H2 Social norms  EI 0.142 2.442 0.015 0.027 Supported
H3 Perceived behavioral control EI -0.103 1.919 0.056 0.016 Supported**
H4 Entrepreneurial Education EI 0.368 8.154 0.000 0.179 Supported
H5 Desire for success EI 0.182 3.933 0.000 0.045 Supported
H6 Social Influence  PR 0.245 5.731 0.000 0.068 Supported
H7 Facilitating Conditions  PR 0.410 8.926 0.000 0.192 Supported
H8 Effort Expectancy  PT 0.359 8.097 0.000 0.150 Supported
H9 Performance Expectancy  PT 0.267 5.374 0.000 0.082 Supported
H10 PR Crowdfunding intentions 0.253 4.428 0.000 0.054 Supported
H11 PT  Crowdfunding intentions 0.308 5.422 0.000 0.081 Supported
H12 EI  Crowdfunding intentions 0.126 2.569 0.010 0.021 Supported
Indirect Relationships
Attitude  EI CI 0.032 2.358 0.019 Supported
Social norms  EI CI 0.018 1.740 0.083 Supported***
Perceived behavioral control  EI CI -0.013 1.533 0.126 Not- Supported
Entrepreneurial Education  EI CI 0.046 2.393 0.017 Supported
Desire for success  EI CI 0.023 2.088 0.037 Supported
Social Influence  PR  CI 0.062 3.186 0.002 Supported
Facilitating Conditions  PR  CI 0.104 3.838 0.000 Supported
Effort Expectancy  PT  CI 0.111 4.562 0.000 Supported
Performance Expectancy  PT  CI 0.082 3.290 0.001 Supported
** Supported but negative at 10 % significance level. ** Supported at 10 % significance level.
EI= Entrepreneurial intentions; PR= Perceived Risk; PT= Perceived Trust; CI= Crowdfunding intentions

- 438 -
 Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 2021, 32(5), 433–445

Multi-Group Analysis (MGA) are supported except H3 and H4. Perceived behavioural
control has no significant effect on the entrepreneurial in-
To maintain the validity of outcomes and conclusions, tentions in two regions independently, i.e. Romania and
Henseler et al. (2016a) developed the measurement invari- South Korea. Social norms show no positive relationship
ance of composite models (MICOM) procedure, which with entrepreneurial intentions in Romania, and entrepre-
builds on the scores of the latent variable that fit with the neurial education shows no positive link with entrepreneur-
trait of composite modelling in partial least squares path ial intentions in South Korea. The results of the MGA were
modelling (PLSPM) (Cheah et al., 2020). We conducted evaluated using the Henseler-MGA nonparametric tech-
MICOM and assessed permutation’s p-values that were nique. This technique assesses the differences between the
larger than 0.05 except for perceived risk and social influ- path coefficients among two regions, and is used to estimate
ence, indicating the compositional invariance was estab- group differences in PLS-SEM (Hair et al., 2019). After es-
lished. Now we can confidently compare standardized path timating relationships of model for both regions- Romania
coefficients across the groups through MGA in PLSPM. and South Korea- the next step was to analyse both regions
Multi-group analysis (MGA) or between-group analysis concurrently for comparison. As illustrated in Table 5, no
is a means to test predefined (also known as a priori) data significant differences can be comprehended for the struc-
groups to verify the existence of significant differences tural relationships hypothesized in all hypotheses, except
across group-specific parameter estimates (e.g., outer social norms on entrepreneurial intentions, as the p-values
weights, outer loadings, and path coefficients) (Hair et al., of the difference in path coefficients between the Romanian
2021). The model was then estimated for the two groups- and South Korean groups are all above 5%. Therefore, we
Romania and South Korea- independently to verify the sig- report a significant difference in the social norms and its in-
nificance of the structural relations as shown in the Table 5. fluence on entrepreneurial intentions in these two countries.
For Romania, all the hypotheses are supported except H2 The overall estimates and individual region estimates along
and H3 and for the South Korean region, all the hypotheses with R2 values are shown in Figure 1.
Table 5
PLS-MGA Results
Romania South Korea Romania - South Korea

p-Value original 1-tailed

Path Coefficients-diff

p-Value new
T- Values

T- Values
P Values

P Values

Relationships Remarks
β
β

No
Attitude  EI 0.157 2.651 0.008 0.325 4.966 0.000 -0.168 0.970 0.059
difference
Significant
Social norms  EI 0.012 0.170 0.865 0.226 2.761 0.006 -0.214 0.978 0.043
difference
Perceived behavioral control No
-0.080 1.183 0.237 -0.108 1.267 0.206 0.028 0.380 0.759
 EI difference
Entrepreneurial Education No
0.136 2.006 0.045 0.114 1.632 0.103 0.022 0.412 0.823
 EI difference
No
Desire for success  EI 0.260 3.299 0.001 0.145 2.745 0.006 0.115 0.116 0.232
difference
No
Social Influence  PR 0.222 3.962 0.000 0.276 4.377 0.000 -0.054 0.748 0.504
difference
Facilitating Conditions  No
0.492 8.016 0.000 0.331 4.856 0.000 0.161 0.038 0.077
PR difference
No
Effort Expectancy  PT 0.276 3.668 0.000 0.445 7.573 0.000 -0.169 0.961 0.078
difference
Performance Expectancy  No
0.286 4.461 0.000 0.251 3.517 0.000 0.036 0.357 0.714
PT difference
PR  Crowdfunding No
0.143 1.761 0.079 0.363 4.518 0.000 -0.220 0.972 0.056
intentions difference
PT  Crowdfunding No
0.358 4.568 0.000 0.252 3.172 0.002 0.106 0.170 0.340
intentions difference
EI  Crowdfunding No
0.360 5.343 0.000 0.354 5.586 0.000 0.006 0.478 0.956
intentions difference
EI= Entrepreneurial intentions; PR= Perceived Risk; PT= Perceived Trust

- 439 -
 Mina Fanea-Ivanovici, Hasnan Baber. The Role of Entrepreneurial Intentions, Perceived Risk and Perceived Trust in…

Figure 1. The structural model

*Significance level where p-value < 0.05; ** Significance level where p-value < 0.10;
βOA and R2OA for Over-all Sample; βRO and R2RO for Romania; βSK AND R2SK for South Korea

Discussion differences. Roibu and Roibu (2016) suggested that strict

social environment is one of the factors in South Korea
The study confirms the proposed model, with few ex- which restrict women to be an entrepreneur as compared to
ceptions. Therefore, the TPB proves to be useful in explain- the social influence in Romania.
ing EIs among students. Within the present study, the non- In South Korea, however, entrepreneurial education is
debatable component of the TPB is attitude towards entre- not an explanatory factor for EIs (Karimi et al., 2016), con-
preneurship, which holds for both countries considered sep- trary to most prior research (Bauboniene et al., 2018; Gieure
arately, but also for the entire sample. The same was found et al., 2019; Ndofirepi, 2020; Nguyen et al., 2019; Wegner
by Al-Jubari et al. (2019), Fragoso et al. (2020), Gieure et et al., 2020). Probably attitudes towards entrepreneurship in
al. 2019, Munir et al., (2019), Nguyen et al. (2019), Bau- a society promoting entrepreneurship weigh more in stu-
boniene et al. (2018) and Esfandiar et al. (2019). Such con- dents’ decisions than formal education, which in the Asian
clusion would place Romania and Korea among the non- country, is not credited with the capacity to form EIs. Lee et
collectivist countries (Siu and Lo, 2011), but such affirma- al. (2005) suggested that entrepreneurial education has
tion is yet to be checked in future research. PBC, however, shown a significant improvement in terms of acknowledge-
is negatively correlated with EIs, contrary to our assump- ment of the importance of entrepreneurial education, after
tion. The perception of non-feasibility does not hamper taking the course among Korean students as compared to the
business students from considering entrepreneurship, which Americans. However, the hypothesis is checked for the en-
could reflect a less risk-adverse attitude. Moreover, PBC has tire sample, as previously reported by (Bauboniene et al.,
no significant influence on EIs in the two countries, ana- 2018; Gieure et al., 2019; Ndofirepi, 2020; Nguyen et al.,
lysed separately. In Romania, SNs do not play an important 2019; Wegner et al., 2020). It is no surprise that desire for
role in students’ EI, in contradiction with the majority of success is an explanatory factor for EIs (Nguyen et al.,
studies in this area (Al-Jubari et al., 2019; Gieure et al., 2019). This is actually the transposition of a personal trait at
2019; Meoli et al., 2020; Munir et al., 2019), bringing this professional level.
study closer to the research of Bauboniene et al. (2018). Perceived risk is positively associated with social influ-
They investigated this factor Lithuania, which is a similar ence and facilitating conditions, whereas perceived trust is
country to Romania both in terms of historic (post-com- positively correlated with effort expectancy and perfor-
munist society) and economic background (recent members mance expectancy. Therefore, the hypothesized correlations
of the European Union) and found a positive, but weak cor- have been checked, which extends the current knowledge,
relation. Our findings are in line with the conclusions drawn currently limited to m-commerce and mobile payment, to
by Esfandiar et al. (2019) in this respect, i.e. no correlation the crowdfunding area. The results highlight the importance
between SNs and EI. SNs have a positive influence on EIs of the crowdfunding platform and its easiness to handle pro-
in South Korea, but no influence in Romania – thus disclos- jects and enhance trust in business entrepreneurs. Perceived
ing substantial country culture differences (Paul et al., 2017; risk is reduced by the approval of class, family and friends,
Shinnar et al., 2012). Indeed, the two countries present sig- who can recommend crowdfunding as a source of funds,
nificant differences in terms of SNs, which confirms cultural which is true for both countries. Facilitating conditions of

- 440 -
 Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 2021, 32(5), 433–445

the platform, which include guiding the entrepreneurs to From an academic point of view, faculty management
post their project, providing the necessary training to attract and members of Business and Economics universities will
more backers, facilitating the interaction with backers, benefit from the present findings. This is because the latter
providing regular updates about the project and, ultimately, confirm the need to keep academic curricula to date with the
helping in promoting business, will reduce the risk of the latest developments of digital markets, and update the taught
entrepreneur. content accordingly. After all, students’ future entrepreneur-
Both perceived risk (surprisingly) and perceived trust ial intentions depend on the specialized education they re-
positively influence crowdfunding intention. Crowdfunding ceive during the study programs and awareness about alterna-
implies raising funds from a large community, therefore the tive financial products is essential in starting new ventures.
risk is somewhat borne by investors, which are individuals The UTAUT-related correlations to perceived risk and
that are willing to finance a certain project or start-up with perceived trust can prove useful to practitioners. Thus, the
a small amount in the total amount required. For an entre- fact that perceived risk is found to be positively influenced
preneur, the risk of failure may only affect the implementa- by social influence and facilitating conditions provides plat-
tion time and credibility, but does not imperil own funds. form owners with insights as to how better design the plat-
Last but not least, entrepreneurial intentions are an explan- form, in terms of image creation, online and offline promo-
atory factor for crowdfunding intentions. With the rapid ad- tion, usability, networking. Moreover, as perceived trust is
vancements of the digital transformation, would-be entre- positively correlated with effort expectancy and perfor-
preneurs have started to consider alternative financial and mance expectancy, platform owners and interested investors
marketing tools, both of which being encapsulated in crowd- will know how to address key questions regarding the pro-
funding. Students, mainly those who are surrounded by posed project and how to check its feasibility.
technology and internet, find this source of funding conven-
ient and easy to procure as compared to the traditional fund- Conclusions
ing channels.
Crowdfunding as a novel FinTech tool is creating new
Theoretical Implications business opportunities for well-established firms to finance
new projects, but also for start-ups and unexperienced en-
The paper is original from a theoretical standpoint as it
trepreneurs (undergraduates and fresh graduates). There-
proposes a novel model, in which UTAUT and perceived
fore, it is of utmost importance for entrepreneurs to be aware
risk and perceived trust correlations are explored in the
of it, and entrepreneurial education plays an important role
crowdfunding context. To the best of our knowledge, little
in such matter. The current paper investigates the entrepre-
has been researched in this respect. Also, the TPB and
neur-side perceived risk and perceived trust stemming from
UTAUT theories are both used to explain crowdfunding and
the UTAUT theory in crowdfunding intentions, along with
entrepreneurial intentions among European and Asian stu-
the TPB, entrepreneurial education and desire for success in
dents, while identifying differences that may be due to the
the formation of EIs, as a preliminary phase to CI. We have
contrasting cultural backgrounds.
found that cultural differences in Asian and European coun-
tries provide contrasting views on the role of SNs, PBC and
entrepreneurial education on EIs.

Practical Implications

Acknowledgement
This research is funded by Woosong University Academic Research in 2021

Appendix A- Assessment of Discriminant Validity using Fornell-Larcker Criteria

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Attitude 0.871
Social norms 0.426 0.901
Perceived
behavioral control 0.227 0.257 0.798
Entrepreneurial 0.191 0.106 -0.079 0.799
Education
Desire for success 0.110 0.072 -0.082 0.432 0.780
Entrepreneurial 0.382 0.277 -0.052 0.519 0.388 0.856
intentions
Social Influence 0.113 0.092 -0.043 0.195 0.077 0.194 0.846
Facilitating 0.050 0.122 -0.072 0.299 0.228 0.225 0.479 0.803
Conditions
Effort Expectancy 0.103 0.098 -0.035 0.242 0.217 0.255 0.383 0.466 0.802
Performance
Expectancy 0.039 0.034 -0.086 0.355 0.222 0.214 0.323 0.383 0.404 0.856

- 441 -
 Mina Fanea-Ivanovici, Hasnan Baber. The Role of Entrepreneurial Intentions, Perceived Risk and Perceived Trust in…

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Perceived Risk 0.110 0.126 -0.092 0.182 0.112 0.256 0.441 0.527 0.403 0.289 0.795
Perceived Trust 0.086 0.121 -0.115 0.212 0.124 0.240 0.450 0.612 0.467 0.412 0.633 0.817
Crowdfunding
intentions 0.083 0.099 -0.090 0.134 0.062 0.264 0.577 0.413 0.333 0.410 0.480 0.498 0.898

References
Al-Jubari, I., Hassan, A., & Linan, F. (2019). Entrepreneurial intention among University students in Malaysia: integrating self-
determination theory and the theory of planned behaviour. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,
15(4), 1323–1342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0529-0
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Baber, H. (2022): Entrepreneurial and Crowdfunding Intentions of Management Students in South Korea. World Journal of Entre-
preneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 18(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.47556/J.WJEMSD.18.1.2022.3
Baber, H., & Fanea-Ivanovici, M. (2021). Motivations behind backers’ contributions in reward-based crowdfunding for movies
and web series. International Journal of Emerging Markets. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-01-2021-0073.
Baber, H. (2020). Intentions to participate in political crowdfunding-from the perspective of civic voluntarism model and theory
of planned behavior. Technology in Society, 63, 101435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101435
Bae, T. J., Qian, S., Miao, C., & Fiet, J. O. (2014). The Relationship Between Entrepreneurship Education and Entrepreneurial
Intentions: A Meta-Analytic Review. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(2), 217–254. https://doi.org/10.11
11%2Fetap.12095
Bauboniene, Z., Hahn, K. H., Puksas, A., & Malinauskiene, E. (2018). Factors influencing student entrepreneurship intentions: the
case of Lithuanian and South Korean universities. In M. Tvaronavičiene (Ed.), Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues,
Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, 6(2), 854–871. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.2(26)
Bewley, A., Burrage, D. M., Ersser, S. J., Hansen, M., & Ward, C. (2014). Identifying individual psychosocial and adherence
support needs in patients with psoriasis: a multinational two‐stage qualitative and quantitative study. Journal of the Euro-
pean academy of dermatology and venereology, 28(6), 763-770. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.12174
Boeuf, B., Darveau, J., & Legoux, R. (2014). Financing creativity: Crowdfunding as a new approach for theatre projects. Interna-
tional Journal of Arts Management, 16(3), 33–48.
Burtch, G., Ghose, A., & Wattal, S. (2016). Secret Admirers: An Empirical Examination of Information Hiding and Contribution
Dynamics in Online Crowdfunding. Information Systems Research, 27(3), 478–496. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.
2016.0642
Busse, V. (2018). Crowdfunding – An Empirical Study on the Entrepreneurial Viewpoint. Advances in Intelligent Networking and
Collaborative Systems, Springer International Publishing, 306–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98557-2_28
Cheah, J. H., Thurasamy, R., Memon, M. A., Chuah, F., & Ting, H. (2020). Multigroup Analysis using SmartPLS: Step-by-Step
Guidelines for Business Research. Asian Journal of Business Research Volume, 10(3), 1–19, https://DOI.org/
10.14707/ajbr.200087
Chong, A. Y. L. (2013). Predicting m-commerce adoption determinants: A neural network approach. Expert Systems with Appli-
cations, 40 (2), 523–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.07.068
De Clercq, D., Honig, B., & Martin, B. (2012). The roles of learning orientation and passion for work in the formation of entrepre-
neurial intention. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 31(6), 652–676.
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0266242611432360
Esfandiar, K., Sharifi-Tehrani, M., Pratt, S., & Altinay, L. (2019). Understanding entrepreneurial intentions: A developed inte-
grated structural model approach. Journal of Business Research, 94, 172–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.
2017.10.045
European Commission (n.d.). Crowdfunding. Available from internet: https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/growth-
and-investment/financing-investment/crowdfunding_en
Fanea-Ivanovici, M. (2018). Transparency of Financial Information on Crowdfunding Platforms – A Prerequisite for Successful
Funding Campaigns. In International Conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION, Walter de Gruyter GmbH,
24 (2), 37–42. https://doi.org/10.1515/kbo-2018-0063
Farrukh, M., Lee, J. W. C., Sajid, M., & Waheed, A. (2019). Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of individualism and collectivism
in perspective of theory of planned behaviour. Education + Training, 61 (7/8), 984–1000. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-09-
2018-0194
Fayolle, A., & Gailly, B. (2013). The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Attitudes and Intention: Hysteresis
and Persistence. Journal of Small Business Management, 53 (1), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12065

- 442 -
 Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 2021, 32(5), 433–445

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.
Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), p. 39. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Fragoso, R., Rocha-Junior, W., & Xavier, A. (2019). Determinant factors of entrepreneurial intention among university students
in Brazil and Portugal. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 32 (1), 33–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.
2018.1551459
Giacomin, O., Janssen, F., Pruett, M., Shinnar, R. S., Llopis, F., & Toney, B. (2011). Entrepreneurial intentions, motivations and
barriers: Differences among American, Asian and European students. International Entrepreneurship and Management
Journal, 7(2), 219-238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-010-0155-y
Gieure, C., Benavides-Espinosa, M. del M., & Roig-Dobon, S. (2019). Entrepreneurial intentions in an international university
environment. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 25(8), 1605–1620. https://doi.org/10.11
08/IJEBR-12-2018-0810
Hair, J. F., Jr., Howard, M. C., & Nitzl, C. (2020). Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory com-
posite analysis. Journal of Business Research, 109, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.069
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European
Business Review, 31 (1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling
(PLS-SEM). Sage publications. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2016a). Testing measurement invariance of composites using partial least squares. In-
ternational Marketing Review, 33(3), 405-431. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2014-0304
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural
equation modelling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-
0403-8
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016b). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines. Indus-
trial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382
Ho, M. H. R., Uy, M. A., Kang, B. N. Y., & Chan, K. Y. (2018). Impact of Entrepreneurship Training on Entrepreneurial Efficacy
and Alertness among Adolescent Youth. Frontiers in Education, Frontiers Media SA, 3.https://doi.org/10.33 89/fe-
duc.2018.00013
Hossain, M., & Oparaocha, G. O. (2017). Crowdfunding: Motives, definitions, typology and ethical challenges. Entrepreneurship
Research Journal, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2015-0045
Islam, M. T., & Khan, M. T. A. (2019). Factors influencing the adoption of crowdfunding in Bangladesh: A study of start-up
entrepreneurs. Information Development, 37(1), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0266666919895554
Jena, R. K. (2020). Measuring the impact of business management Student’s attitude towards entrepreneurship education on en-
trepreneurial intention: A case study. Computers in Human Behavior, 107, 106275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.
2020.106275
Jones, P., Jones, A., Packham, G., & Miller, C. (2008). Student attitudes towards enterprise education in Poland: a positive impact.
In Nabi, G. (Ed.) Education + Training, Emerald, 50 (7), pp. 597–614. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910810909054
Kang, M., Gao, Y., Wang, T., & Zheng, H. (2016). Understanding the determinants of funders’ investment intentions on crowd-
funding platforms. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(8), 1800–1819. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-
0312
Karimi, S., Biemans, H. J. A., Lans, T., Chizari, M., & Mulder, M. (2014). The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education: A Study of
Iranian Students’ Entrepreneurial Intentions and Opportunity Identification. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(1),
187–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12137
Khalilzadeh, J., Ozturk, A. B., & Bilgihan, A. (2017). Security-related factors in extended UTAUT model for NFC based mobile
payment in the restaurant industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 460–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.001
Khursheed, A., Mustafa, F., Fatima, M., & Siddique, F. (2018). Entrepreneurial Intentions: Gem Based Empirical Analysis on the
Northern Europe and Asian Countries. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge, University College of Busi-
ness in Prague, 6 (2). https://doi.org/10.37335/ijek.v6i2.78
Kim, M. J., Bonn, M., & Lee, C. K. (2019). The effects of motivation, deterrents, trust, and risk on tourism crowdfunding behav-
iour. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25(3), 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2019.1687533
Kim, M. J., & Hall, C. M. (2020). What drives visitor economy crowdfunding? The effect of digital storytelling on unified theory
of acceptance and use of technology. Tourism Management Perspectives, 34, 100638. https://doi.org/10.10
16/j.tmp.2020.100638
Kim, M. J., Hall, C. M., & Kim, D. K. (2020). Why do investors participate in tourism incentive crowdfunding? The effects of
attribution and trust on willingness to fund. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 37(2), 141–154.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2020.1722784

- 443 -
 Mina Fanea-Ivanovici, Hasnan Baber. The Role of Entrepreneurial Intentions, Perceived Risk and Perceived Trust in…

Kock, N. (2020). Using indicator correlation fit indices in PLS-SEM: Selecting the algorithm with the best fit. Data Analysis
Perspectives Journal, 1(4), 1-4.
Krueger, N. F., JR, Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business
Venturing, 15(5–6), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00033-0
Kuselias, S. (2020). Follow the Crowd: How Social Information and Social Identity Influence Investing Decisions. Abacus, 56(3),
407–435. https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12188
Laguia, A., Moriano, J. A., & Gorgievski, M. J. (2019). A psychosocial study of self-perceived creativity and entrepreneurial
intentions in a sample of university students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 44–57. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.10
16/j.tsc.2018.11.004
Lee, S. M., Chang, D., & Lim, S. B. (2005). Impact of entrepreneurship education: A comparative study of the US and Korea. The
international entrepreneurship and management journal, 1(1), 27-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-005-6674-2
Linan, F., & Chen, Y. (2009). Development and Cross–Cultural Application of a Specific Instrument to Measure Entrepreneurial
Intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593–617. https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1540-6520.2009.00318.x
Meoli, A., Fini, R., Sobrero, M., & Wiklund, J. (2020). How entrepreneurial intentions influence entrepreneurial career choices:
The moderating influence of social context. Journal of Business Venturing, 35(3), 105982. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jbusvent.2019.105982
Mhango, M. W. (n.d.). Assessing entrepreneurial career intentions of family and consumer sciences students in higher education:
a model testing approach. Iowa State University. https://doi.org/10.31274/rtd-180813-9928
Moon, Y., & Hwang, J. (2018). Crowdfunding as an Alternative Means for Funding Sustainable Appropriate Technology: Ac-
ceptance Determinants of Backers. Sustainability, 10(5), 1456. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051456
Moriano, J. A., Gorgievski, M., Laguna, M., Stephan, U., & Zarafshani, K. (2011). A Cross-Cultural Approach to Understanding
Entrepreneurial Intention. Journal of Career Development, 39(2), 162–185. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F08948453
10384481
Munir, H., Jianfeng, C., & Ramzan, S. (2019). Personality traits and theory of planned behavior comparison of entrepreneurial
intentions between an emerging economy and a developing country. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior &
Research, 25(3), 554–580. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-05-2018-0336
Ndofirepi, T. M. (2020). Relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial goal intentions: psychological traits
as mediators. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 9 (1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-020-0115-x
Nguyen, A. T., Do, T. H. H., Vu, T. B. T., Dang, K. A., & Nguyen, H. L. (2019). Factors affecting entrepreneurial intentions
among youths in Vietnam. Children and Youth Services Review, 99, 186–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.
2019.01.039
Patil, P., Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., & Raghavan, V. (2020). Understanding consumer adoption of mobile payment in India:
Extending Meta-UTAUT model with personal innovativeness, anxiety, trust, and grievance redressal. International Journal
of Information Management, 54, 102144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102144
Paul, J., Hermel, P., & Srivatava, A. (2017). Entrepreneurial intentions—theory and evidence from Asia, America, and Europe.
Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 15(3), 324–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-017-0208-1
Perez-Fernandez, H., Delgado-Garcia, J. B., Martin-Cruz, N., & Rodriguez-Escudero, A. I. (2020). The Role of Affect in the
Development of Entrepreneurial Intentions. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 1(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.15
15/erj-2019-0124
Rodrigues, M., Silva, R., & Franco, M. (2021). Entrepreneurial Attitude and Intention in Higher Education Students: What Factors
Matter? Entrepreneurship Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2020-0107
Rodriguez-Ricardo, Y., Sicilia, M., & Lopez, M. (2019). Altruism and Internal Locus of Control as Determinants of the Intention
to Participate in Crowdfunding: The Mediating Role of Trust. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce
Research, 14(3), 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-18762019000300102
Roibu, I., & Roibu, P. A. (2016). Barriers to women entrepreneurship: a comparative analysis between South Korea and Roma-
nia. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, 8 (1), 183–203. https://doi.org/10.1515/ausp-2016-0013
Rossi, A., & Vismara, S. (2018). What do crowdfunding platforms do? A comparison between investment-based platforms in
Europe. Eurasian Business Review, 8(1), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-017-0092-6
San Martin, H., Hernandez, B., & Herrero, A. (2020). Social Consciousness and Perceived Risk as Drivers of Crowdfunding as a
Socially Responsible Investment in Tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 60 (1), 16–30. https://doi.org/10.117
7%2F0047287519896017
Schwienbacher, A. (2019). Equity crowdfunding: anything to celebrate? Venture Capital, 21(1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.10
80/13691066.2018.1559010
Shinnar, R. S., Giacomin, O., & Janssen, F. (2012). Entrepreneurial Perceptions and Intentions: The Role of Gender and Culture.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(3), 465–493. https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1540-6520.2012.00509.x

- 444 -
 Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 2021, 32(5), 433–445

Shneor, R., Mrzyglod, U., Adamska-Mieruszewska, J., & Fornalska-Skurczynska, A. (2021). The role of social trust in reward
crowdfunding campaigns’ design and success. Electronic Markets, Springer Science and Business Media LLC.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-021-00456-5
Smith, S., Hamilton, M., & Fabian, K. (2019). Entrepreneurial drivers, barriers and enablers of computing students: gendered
perspectives from an Australian and UK university. Studies in Higher Education, 45(9), 1892–1905.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1637840
Steigenberger, N. (2017). Why supporters contribute to reward-based crowdfunding. International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behavior & Research, 23(2), 336–353. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-04-2016-0117
Stemler, A.R. (2013). The JOBS Act and crowdfunding: Harnessing the power-and money-of the masses. Business Horizons,
56(3), 271–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2013.01.007
Thies, F., Wessel, M., & Benlian, A. (2016). Effects of Social Interaction Dynamics on Platforms. Journal of Management Infor-
mation Systems, 33(3), 843–873. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2016.1243967
Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly,
27(3), 425. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.2307/30036540
Wegner, D., Thomas, E., Teixeira, E. K., & Maehler, A. E. (2019). University entrepreneurial push strategy and students’ entre-
preneurial intention. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 26(2), 307–325. https://doi.org/10.110
8/IJEBR-10-2018-0648
Wei, X., Liu, X., & Sha, J. (2019). How Does the Entrepreneurship Education Influence the Students’ Innovation? Testing on the
Multiple Mediation Model. Frontiers in Psychology, Frontiers Media SA, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01557
Yang, X., Zhao, K., Tao, X., & Shiu, E. (2019). Developing and Validating a Theory-Based Model of Crowdfunding Investment
Intention-Perspectives from Social Exchange Theory and Customer Value Perspective. Sustainability, 11(9), 2525.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092525
Zhao, Q., Chen, C. D., Wang, J. L., & Chen, P. C. (2017). Determinants of backers’ funding intention in crowdfunding: Social
exchange theory and regulatory focus. Telematics and Informatics, 34(1), 370–384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.tele.2016.06.006
Zheng, H., Hung, J.-L., Qi, Z., & Xu, B. (2016). The role of trust management in reward-based crowdfunding. In Wu H. & Guan-
dong X. A. (Eds.), Online Information Review, 40 (1), 97–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/OIR-04-2015-0099

Authors’ Biographies
Mina Fanea-Ivanovici received a PhD in Economics in 2010. She is currently an Associate Professor at the Department
of Economics and Economic Policies at the Bucharest University of Economic Studies. Her main research interests revolve
around areas such as creative economy, creative industries, cultural economy, crowdfunding, digitalization, knowledge man-
agement, intercultural dialogue and intercultural competencies. She has published numerous articles and books and was a
member of five research projects and director of one research grant. In 2016 she worked as an independent expert in charge
of drafting and revisiting Romania’s Strategy for Culture and National Heritage.
Hasnan Baber is currently working as an Assistant Professor in Endicott College of International Studies, Woosong
University, South Korea. He has published numerous research papers through reputed publishers like Elsevier, Springer,
Emerald, Sage, etc. His areas of research are Crowdfunding, FinTech, Behavioral Finance, Islamic Finance, and Service
Quality. He has presented research papers and articles at various international conferences. He is also serving as an advisory
and editorial board member of different reputed publishing houses.
The article has been reviewed.
Received in June 2021; accepted in December 2021.

This article is an Open Access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

- 445 -