Competing stakeholder narratives on crypto-assets: Miracle or mirage?
Journal of Information Technology, ISSN: 1466-4437, Vol: 39, Issue: 2, Page: 339-360
2024
- 2Citations
- 20Usage
- 32Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations2
- Citation Indexes2
- CrossRef2
- Usage20
- Abstract Views20
- Captures32
- Readers32
- 32
Article Description
Academic and practitioner interest in crypto-assets is gaining momentum. Different values and agendas influence regulatory policy. Competing ideologies and social norms about the efficacy of regulatory regimes, the influence of innovation philosophies, and the need to foster ethical principles and practices underpin debates on crypto-assets. Semi-structured interviews were carried out in the USA and UK with regulators, tech firms, institutional and retail investors, and crypto social media influencers. Stakeholder groups were classified as interventionists, innovators, influencers, and investors. The research builds a data structure from extant literature and empirical research. Aggregate dimensions of inchoate technology, regulatory intervention, and innovation social norms reflect complex and competing stakeholder positions on crypto assets. Findings show crypto-assets are not homogenous, but highly differentiated with potential effects and outcomes determined by algorithmic code. However, competing stakeholder agendas obfuscate policy development for decentralized finance.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85172689051&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02683962231202534; https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/02683962231202534; https://aisel.aisnet.org/jit/vol39/iss2/5; https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1763&context=jit
SAGE Publications
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know