Stock Investment Decision: The Effects of Personal Factors and
Moderating Role of Years of Service
TIPRI ROSE KARTIKA
Publishing Department
State Polytechnic of Creative Media
Jakarta, INDONESIA
NOPRIADI SAPUTRA
Management Department, Binus Business School,
Binus University,
Jakarta, INDONESIA
DAVID TJAHJANA
Universitas Multimedia Nusantara
Jakarta, INDONESIA
ADLER HAYMANS MANURUNG
Faculty of Business and Economics
Bhayangkara Jaya University
Jakarta, INDONESIA
Abstract: - This paper aims to elaborate stock investment decision and to examine the impact of five influential
factors as independent variables and the influence of years of investment as mediating variable. This paper is
based on empirical study which involved 286 individual investors in Indonesia Stock Exchange using data from
Riri et.al (2020). Structural equation modelling approach was used for estimating relationship between influential
factors (e.g., personal financial needs, overconfidence, advocate recommendation, social relevance, and self or
firm image) on stock investment decisions. The result found that decision on stock investment is determined by
social relevance, overconfidence, personal financial need, and advocate recommendation significantly and
positively. Years of Investment has played moderating role on relationship between for advocate
recommendation and personal with stock investment decisions. Years of Investment is moderating variable to
become a novelty this paper.
Key-Words: - stock investment decisions, years of investment, structural equation model
Received: June 18, 2021. Revised: November 29, 2021. Accepted: January 5, 2022. Published: January 7, 2022. .
1 Introduction
Investment in stock has high risk compared to other
investment instrument. Investor should consider
many things before, during, and after making
decision in a stock investment in the market. The
discussion on stock investment decision is a
combination of psychology and finance theories
which is called behaviour finance. Topic behaviour
finance become a hot topic discussion in area of
Finance Research. Some researcher investigated
psychological aspect especially personal factor on
stock investment decisions. Zahera and Bansal
(2018) developed systematic literature review on
individual behaviour to stock investment decisions.
Wang (2001) have explored non-rational investors'
survival in a game model with a large population. The
study focused on sentiment and overconfidence of
the investors Nagy and Obenberge (1994)
investigated this case to individual equity investors
with substantial holdings in Fortune 500 firm. Rizvi
and Abrar (2015) and Ahmad (2017) studied
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.11
Tipri Rose Kartika, Nopriadi Saputra,
David Tjahjana, Adler Haymans Manurung
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
107
Volume 19, 2022
affecting factors on individual investor behaviour in
Pakistan. Phan and Zhou (2014a, 2014b) examined
influential factors on individual investor behaviour in
Vietnam. Chang (2010) and Riri and Manurung
(2020) investigated the psychological factors which
influences investment decision making in Indonesia.
Intention to buy stock in the market is
sometimes called as stock investment decisions.
Research in this area mostly related to psychology
and finance. Selden (1912) introduced psychological
aspect which is related in the stock market at the first
time. Then, it was followed by Festinger (1957) who
introduced theory of cognitive dissonance; Slovic
(1972) who studied psychological of human
judgment and its implications in investment decision
making. Kahneman and Tversky (1979) introduced
theory of prospect which is linked to analysis about
decision making under risk. Daniel et.al (1998) have
examined the relationship between psychology of
investors and stock market over and. under reaction.
Daniel et.al (2002) have examined the psychology of
investor in policy implication and capital markets.
Markowitz (1952) introduced portfolio theory that it
explained behaviour of investor individual. They
select high return and small risk for investment
instrument. Boda and Sunitha (2018) have studied the
psychology of investors in investment decision
making which were focused on cognitive psychology
and arbitrage limits. Pang and Zhou (2014) have
proved that excessive optimism, overconfidence,
psychology of risk, and herd behaviour on
behavioural intention which mediated by attitude
toward investment behaviour. Riri and Manurung
(2020) stated that there are five personal factors (e.g.,
self or firm image, overconfidence, advocate
recommendation, social relevance, and personal
financial needs) have impacted on decisions of stock
investment.
Previously empirical studies examined
psychology factors directly impact on stock
investment decisions. This paper addressed years of
investment as moderating variable. Does year of
investment strengthen or weaken the relationship five
personal factors (e.g., firm or self-image,
overconfidence, personal financial needs, social
relevance, and advocate recommendation) on the
decision of stocks investment? As moderating
variable, years of investment could strengthen or
weaken relationship between dependent and
independent variables (Manurung, 2019, Sharma
1981). Moderating variable is a research contribution
for stock investment decisions. This paper proposes
a contribution by examining years of investment as
moderating variable.
2 Literature Review
Stock investment decisions is about individual
perspective on making decisions about how
individual to decide buying or selling stocks in the
market. At least, there are three conceptual theories:
(1) utility theory, (2) personal intention, and (3)
theory of planned behaviour (TPB). Utility theory is
related on investment decision and explained how
goods or services provide benefit to the individual by
doing personal investment activities. Second, Selden
(1912) had pioneered to establish the conceptual
connection between psychology and stock market
activities. Slovic (1972) studied psychological of
human judgment and impacted on investment
decision making. Kahneman and Tversky (1973)
introduced a judgmental heuristic analysis on stock
investment decision. Tversky and Kahneman (1979)
introduced the theory of prospect to investment
decision. This theory improved theory of utility,
theory of cognitive dissonance advices that people
have an inner drive to avoid dissonance or
disharmony or to hold all related attitudes and
behaviour in a dynamic harmony (Festinger, 1957).
This is known as the principle of cognitive
consistency
Figure 1. Utility for Personal
Source: Danthine and Donaldson (2015, p.5).
Third theory is theory of planned behaviour (TPB)
which explains about individual intention for buying
something. TPB was introduced by Ajzen (1991)
which stated the intentions can be estimated with
high accuracy from attitudes toward the perceived
behavioural control , and subjective norms.
3 Methods
This paper is based on quantitative study which
cross-sectional approach for examining the
relationship between five individual factors as
independent variables and year of investment as
mediating variable with stock investment decision as
dependent variable. Structural equation modelling
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.11
Tipri Rose Kartika, Nopriadi Saputra,
David Tjahjana, Adler Haymans Manurung
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
108
Volume 19, 2022
was used for estimating effects of independent and
mediating variables on dependent variable. The
research used data which were provided by Riri et.al
(2020). The respondent profile is demonstrated on
Table 1. The data was collected by utilizing online
questionnaire from 385 individual stock investors in
Indonesia Stock Exchange. The questionnaire
consists of 29 indicators with Likert scale for
measuring seven variables.
4 Methodology
Figure 2. shows the research model which consist of
one moderating, one dependent, and five independent
variables. The independent variables consist of
personal financial needs, overconfidence, social
relevance, self or firm image, and advocate
recommendation. Stock investment decisions is a
dependent variable and years of investment as
moderating variable.
The mathematic model is as follows:
SIDi = a1 PFNi + a OVCi + a3 SRi + a4 SIMi
+ a5 AVRi + a6YOIi + a7(PNF*YOI)i
+ a8 (OVC*YOI)i + a9(SR*YOI)i
+ a10 (SIM*YOI)i + a11 (AVR*YOI)i + ε
SID = Stock Investment Decisions for i
PFN = Personal Financial Needs for i
OVC = overconfidence for i
SR = Social Relevance for i
SIM = Self Image / Firm Image for i
AVR = Advocate Recommendation for i
YOI = Years of Investment.
In this discussion, research reported three finding
which are validity and reliability instruments. It
followed to discuss relationship independent variable
to dependent variable. At the end, discussion of years
of investment used as moderating variable in in this
research.
Figure 2. Research Model
5 Hypothesis
Someone needs more income to provide their life.
Income is a variable of Personals Needs. Ali and
Tariq (2013), Kabete and Kipkirong (2018) and Riri
et al (2020) has proved their Hypothesis which is
Personal Financial Needs affected Stock Investment
Decision. Wang (2001), Zhou (2014), Xia et.al
(2014), Tekc , B., and N. Yılmaz and Riri et.al
(2020) has done research for Overconfidence to
affect Stock Investment Decision.
Ali and Tariq (2013) and Riri et.al (2020) has also
proved their hypothesis about firm image affect stock
Investment Decision.
Ali and Tariq (2013), Akbar et.al (2016) and Riri et
al (2020) also proved the hypothesis of advocate
recommendation affected stock investment decision.
6 Result and Data Analysis
Data is collected using a questioner which is
processed by Smart PLS. The Result is shown by
Table 1, Table 2. Table 3 and Table 4. Table 1
showed that Statistical Descriptive about profile the
sample. Table 2 and 3 show the validity and
Reliability test. This research used Questionnaire to
get data for analysing of Stock Investment Decisions
which are affected some variables. Loading Factor,
AVE, communality, and composite reliability is used
to test validity.
Value of AVE should be more than 0.5 that it
explained variance of indicator. Chain (1998) stated
that an indicator should have validity when it has
loading factor equal and more than 0.7 and T-
Statistics more than 1.96. There are 27 indicators for
5 constructs. These indicators have Loading factor
varying from 0.714 to 0.873, and AVE also varying
from 0.609 to 0.728. It means that all indicator has
validity to reflect constructs.
Then, this research also tested the reliability of
indicators or instrument. CR (composite reliability)
and CA (Cronbach's alpha) scores used to indicate
reliability. CA score should be more than 0.7 and CR
score should be also more than 0.7. CA scores are
varying from 0.786 to 0.875. CR scores of constructs
are varying from 0.862 to 0.901. The results indicate
all constructs have reliability significantly. Based on
the results, the instrument has validity and reliability,
and it could be to do further exploration.
Table 4 shows the result of Hypothesis testing.
Variable of Overconfidence, Advocate
Recommendation, Social Relevance and Personal
Needs significantly affected Stock Investment
Decision. Firm Image does not affect Stock
Investment Decision. Year of Investment as
Moderating Variable could moderate Personal Needs
Personal Financial
Needs
Stock Investment
Decisions
Overconfidence
Social Relevance
Self-Image / Firm
Image
Advocate
Recommendation
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.11
Tipri Rose Kartika, Nopriadi Saputra,
David Tjahjana, Adler Haymans Manurung
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
109
Volume 19, 2022
Table 1. Respondent Profile
and Advocate Recommendation to Stock Investment
Decision.
7 Discussion
In this sub-section, the discussion is how relationship
overconfidence, self or firm image, advocate
recommendation, personal needs, and social
relevance toward decisions on stock investment. Riri
et.al (2020) investigated determinant of stock
investment decisions which are firm image or self-
image, overconfidence, social relevance, personal
financial need, and advocate recommendation. The
research model shows the results on Figure 2 and
Figure 3.
Personal Need is a factor that someone to do
for fulfil it. Income from salary does not enough to
fulfil daily expenditure for his life, so she should do
something to get another income by investment.
Personal need has relationship to stock
investment decision which has weak relationship and
significant of 10%.
The coefficient path is 0.227 or less than relationship
advocate recommendation with stock investment
decision that it is small, and it called weak
relationship. This personal need has the second
highest effect to stock investment decision.
This research supports the previous research
and the theory. Ali and Tariq (2013) investigated
Personal Needs on Stock Investment Decisions. They
found that strong influence Personal needs on
individual equity investor decision making. Kabete
and Kipkirong (2018) investigated personal need on
stock investment decision. They found that personal
financial needs had a positive effect on individual
short-term investment decisions. Riri et.al (2020)
examined effect of overconfidence on Stock
Investment Decisions. They found that Personal
Need significantly positive affect stock investment
decisions.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.11
Tipri Rose Kartika, Nopriadi Saputra,
David Tjahjana, Adler Haymans Manurung
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
110
Volume 19, 2022
Sources: Process by Researcher
Table 2. The Analysis of Validity and Reliability
Sources: Process by Researcher
Table 3. Analysis of Discriminant Validity
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.11
Tipri Rose Kartika, Nopriadi Saputra,
David Tjahjana, Adler Haymans Manurung
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
111
Volume 19, 2022
Advocate recommendation has relationship to
stock investment decision which has weak
relationship and significant of 1%. The coefficient
path is 0.263 or higher than relationship between
Overconfidence and Stock Investment Decision,
relationship firm image and stock investment
decision a that is small, and it called weak
relationship. These results supported previous
studies and theory.
Ali and Tariq (2013) found advocate
recommendation on Stock Investment Decisions.
They found that strong influence advocate
recommendation on individual equity investor
decision making. Akbar et.al (2016) examined
investor decision to buy shares that stated based on
recommendation by stock brokerage, colleague in
office, friend, and family.
Somathilake (2020) investigated advocate
recommendation on stock investment decisions. He
found that advocate recommendation influenced the
individual investment decisions, but they do not
much consider about accounting information. Riri
et.al (2020) studied effect of advocate
recommendation on Stock Investment Decisions.
They found that advocate recommendation
significantly positive affect stock investment
decisions.
Social relevance has relationship to stock
investment decision which has weak relationship and
significant of 10%. The coefficient path is 0.149 or
higher than relationship firm image with stock
investment decision that is small, and it called weak
relationship. These results supported previous studies
and theory. William (2007) investigated social
relevance on stock investment decisions. They found
that it strong influenced to invest in stocks. Riri et.al
(2020) explored effect of Social Relevance on Stock
Investment Decisions. They found that Social
Relevance significantly positive affect Stock
Decisions.
Years of Investment
In this research, year of investment was used
to be moderating variable to estimate relationship
Overconfidence, self-image / firm image, Social
Relevance, Advocate Recommendation, Personal
Financial Needs on stock investment decisions.
Sharma (1991) and Manurung (2019) stated that
moderating variable is a variable to strength or weak
the relationship independent variable to dependent
variable. This research found that Advocate
Recommendation and Personal Financial Needs
Variables are significantly to have relationship with
stock investment decisions by year of investment as
moderating variable.
Table 4. Hypotheses Testing
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.11
Tipri Rose Kartika, Nopriadi Saputra,
David Tjahjana, Adler Haymans Manurung
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
112
Volume 19, 2022
Figure 3. Statistical Output
8 Conclusion
This research has objective to investigate
internal and external personal variable to affect stock
investment decisions. This research is a research of
behavior finance which is combined investment and
psychology. Previous research mostly investigated
directly factors affecting stock investment Decision
without including moderating variable. This research
entered year of investment as moderating variable.
Based on result and previously explanation, this
paper come to two conclusions: (1) all variable
internal and external personal variable has effect to
stock investment decisions by individual investor. (2)
Year of investment could be a moderating variable
for relationship between personal needs and advocate
recommendation with stock investment decisions.
References:
[1] Akbar, M., Salman, A., Mughal, K. S., Fahad
Mehmood, F. and N. Makarevic (2016), Factors
Affecting the IndividualDecision Making:a Case
Study of Islamabad Stock Exchange, European
Journal of Economic Studies,, Vol. 15, Is.1, pp.
242-258.
[2] Ajzen, I. (1991). "The theory of planned
behavior." Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes Vol. 50. No. 2, pp.
179-211.
[3] Ajzen, I. (2020), The theory of planned
behavior: Frequently asked questions,
Human Behavior & Emerging Technology,
Vol. 2, pp. 314–324. DOI: 10.1002/hbe2.195
[4] Baker, M and J. Wurgler (2007), Investor
Sentiment in the Stock Market, Journal of
Economic Perspectives, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp.
129 – 151.
[5] Boda, J. R. and G. Sunitha (2018), Investor’s
Psychology in Investment Decision Making:
A Behavioral Finance Approach,
International Journal of Pure and Applied
Mathematics, Vol. 119, No. 7, pp. 1253 –
1261.
[6] Chang, H. H. (2010), An Investigation of
Psychological Factors Influencing
Investment Decision Making, Indonesian
Capital Market Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp 73
– 86.
[7] Chin, W. W. (1998), Issues and Opinion on
Structural Equation Modelling, MIS
Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. vii-xvi
[8] Danthine, J. P. and J. B. Donaldson (2015),
Intermediate Financial Theory, 3rd Eds.,
Academic Press of ELSEVIER.
[9] Daniel, K., Hirshleifer, D., & Teoh, S. H.
(2002). Investor psychology in capital
markets: evidence and policy implications.
Journal of Monetary Economics, 49(1), 139–
209. doi:10.1016/s0304-3932(01)00091-5
[10] Daniel, K., Hirshleifer, D., and A.
Subrahmanyam (1998), Investor
Psychology and Security Market Under-
and Overreactions, Journal of Finance,
Vol. 53, No. 6, pp. 1839 – 1885.
[11] Dasgupta, R., & Singh, R. (2018). Investor
sentiment antecedents: A structural
equation modeling approaching an
emerging market context. Review of
Behavioral Finance. doi:10.1108/rbf-07-
2017-0068
[12] Deo, M. and V. Sundar (2015), Factors
Influencing Investment Decisions of
Individual Investors, Rajagiri Management
Journal, Vol. 9, Issue 2, pp. 67 – 82.
[13] Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of cognitive
dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
[14] Kabete, P. M. and D. T. Kipkirong (2018),
Determinants of Individual Short-Term
Investment Decisions: The Moderating
Effect of Investors’ Personal Quality in
Nairobi Securities Exchange, American
Based Research Journal, Vol. 7, Issue 7,
pp. 20 – 27.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.11
Tipri Rose Kartika, Nopriadi Saputra,
David Tjahjana, Adler Haymans Manurung
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
113
Volume 19, 2022
[15] Kadariya, S. (2012), Factors affecting
investor decision making: A case of
Nepalese capital market, Journal of
Research in Economics and International
Finance (JREIF), Vol. 1(1) pp. 16-30.
[16] Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1973).
Availability: A Heuristic for Judging
Frequency and Probibality. Cognitive
Psychology. 5(1)
[17] Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (1979),
Prospect Theory: Analysis of Decision
under Risk; Econometrica, Vol. 47, pp. 263
– 292.
[18] Mak, M. K., & Ip, W. (2017). An
exploratory study of investment behaviour
of investors. International Journal of
Engineering Business Management, 9,
184797901771152.
doi:10.1177/1847979017711520.
[19] Manurung, A. H. (2019), Model dan
Estimasi dalam Riset Manajemen dan
Keuangan (Model and Estimation in
Management dan Finance Research), PT
Adler Manurung Press, Jakarta
[20] Mishra, K. C., & Metilda, M. J. (2015). A
study on the impact of investment
experience, gender, and level of education
on overconfidence and self-attribution
bias. IIMB Management Review, 27(4),
228–239. doi: 10.1016/j.iimb.2015.09.001
[21] Nagy, R. A., & Obenberger, R. W. (1994).
Factors Influencing Individual Investor
Behavior. Financial Analysts Journal,
50(4), 63–68. doi: 10.2469/faj.v50.n4.63
[22] Obamuyi, T. M. (2013), Factors
Influencing Investment Decisions in
Capital Market: A Study of Individual
Investors in Nigeria, ORGANIZATIONS
AND MARKETS IN EMERGING
ECONOMIES, VOL. 4, No. 1, pp. 141 –
161.
[23] Olsen, R. A. (2008). Cognitive Dissonance:
The Problem Facing Behavioral Finance.
Journal of Behavioral Finance, 9(1), 1–4.
doi:10.1080/15427560801896552
[24] Pahlevi, R. W. and I. I. Oktaviani (2018),
Determinants of Individual Investor
Behaviour in Stock Investment Decisions,
Accounting and Financial Review, 1(2): p.
53-61,
[25] Phan, K. C. and J. Zhou (2014a), Factors
Influencing Individual Investor Behavior:
An Empirical Study of the Vietnamese Stock
Market, American Journal of Business and
Management, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 77-94.
[26] Phan, K. C. and J. Zhou (2014b),
Vietnamnese Individual Investor Behavior
in the Stock market: An Eexploratory Study,
Research Journal of Social Science &
Management Vol. 3, No. 12, pp. 46 - 54.
[27] Phan, D.T.T., Le, V.H.T., & Nguyen,
T.T.H., (2020). Overconfidence Bias,
Comparative Evidence between Vietnam,
and Selected ASEAN Countries. Journal of
Asian Finance, Economics and Business,
Vol. 7, No. 3, 101–113.
https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.n
o3.101
[28] Peranginangin, Y (2009), How the
Indonesia Stock Exchange Reacts to
Information: A Speed of Adjustment
Coefficients Study, Indonesian Capital
Market Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp 89 – 102.
[29] Riri, V., Manurung, A. H. and T. R. Kartika
(2020); Effect of Overconfidence and
Behavioral Motivation on Stock Investment
Decisions; International Journal of
Creative Research Thoughts, Vol. 8, Issue
11; pp. 503 – 510.
[30] Rizvi and Abrar (2015), Factors Affecting
an Individual Investor Behavior - An
Empirical Study in Twin Cities (Rawalpindi
and Islamabad) of Pakistan; International
Journal of Economics and Management,
Vol. 5, No. 5, pp. 1 – 27.
[31] Sehgal, M. and D. Singh (2012).
"Psychology of investors based on value
and life-style survey." International
Journal of Transformations in Business
Management 2(2)
[32] Selden, G. C. (1912), The Psychology of
The Stock Market, Ticker Publishing
Company.
[33] Sharma, S., Durand, R. M. and O. Gur-Arie
(1981), Identification and Analysis of
Moderator Variables, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 291 – 300.
[34] Shiller, R. J. (2000). Measuring Bubble
Expectations and Investor Confidence.
Journal of Psychology and Financial
Markets, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp, 49 – 60.
doi:10.1207/s15327760jpfm0101_05
[35] Slovic, P. (1972). Psycholgical Study of
Human Judgment: Implications for
Investment Decision Making; The Journal
of Finance, 27(4), 779–799.
[36] Tekc , B., and N. Yılmaz (2015). Are
individual stock investors overconfident?
Evidence from an emerging market. Journal
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.11
Tipri Rose Kartika, Nopriadi Saputra,
David Tjahjana, Adler Haymans Manurung
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
114
Volume 19, 2022
of Behavioral and Experimental Finance,
5, 35-45.
[37] Wang, F. A (2001), Overconfidence,
Investor Sentiment, and Evolution, Journal
of Financial Intermediation, Vol. 10. pp.
138–170.
[38] Williams, G. (2007), Some Determinants of
the Socially Responsible Investment
Decision: A Cross-Country Study, The
Journal of Behavioral Finance, Vol. 8, No.
1, pp. 43–57
[39] Xia, T., Wang, Z., & Li, K. (2014).
Financial Literacy Overconfidence and
Stock Market Participation. Social
Indicators Research, 119(3), 1233–1245.
[40] Zahera, S. A. and R. Bansal (2018), Do
investors exhibit behavioral biases in
investment decision making? A Systematic
Review", Qualitative Research in Financial
Markets, Vol. 10 Issue: 2, pp.210-251,
https://doi.org/10.1108/QRFM-04-2017-
0028Congress Marketing Trends, Venice,
Italy.
[41] Huang, W.D., Yoo, S.J., & Choi, J.H.
(2008). Correlating college students'
learning styles and how they use Web 2.0
applications for learning. In C. Bonk et al.
(Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference
on E-Learning in Corporate, Government,
Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp.
2752-2759). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
[42] Tingley, M. W., Monahan, W. B.,
Beissinger, S. R., & Moritz, C. (2009).
Birds track their Grinnellian nice through
a century of climate change. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Science, USA,
106,19637-19643.
[43] Govaerts, S., Verbert, K., Klerkx, J., &
Duval, E. (2010). Visualizing activities for
self-reflection and awareness. Lecture
Notes in Computer Science, 6483, 91-100.
[44] British Learning Association (2005).
Quality mark profiles. Retrieved August 10.
2005, from http://www.british-
learning.org.uk/qualitymark/pages/profiles
.htm
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.11
Tipri Rose Kartika, Nopriadi Saputra,
David Tjahjana, Adler Haymans Manurung
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
115
Volume 19, 2022