Article Sidebar

Download
PDF

Main Article Content

Abstract

Public interest in using Islamic banking services is growing but remains limited in actual behavioral adoption. This study aims to analyze the determinants of public interest in Islamic banks through the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) framework, which includes attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. A descriptive qualitative method was employed through in-depth interviews with 20 informants across three major cities. The findings reveal that although most respondents hold positive attitudes toward Islamic banking values, behavioral intention is not fully realized due to technical constraints, lack of social reinforcement, and perceived access difficulties. The integration of all three TPB components plays a crucial role in shaping and converting intention into actual usage. The study implies the need for public education, digital service enhancement, and social norm reinforcement to strengthen Islamic banking adoption. This research offers both theoretical and practical insights for policy development and behavior-based marketing strategies.

Keywords

islamic bank public interest theory of planned behavior user perception

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

References

  1. Aziz, M., Yusron, A., & Fadillah, R. (2023). Kinerja Keuangan Bank Syariah dan Konvensional: Studi Komparatif di Indonesia. Jurnal Keuangan dan Perbankan Islam, 7(1), 22–37.
  2. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  3. Firdaus, A., & Latifah, N. (2021). Analisis Efisiensi Bank Syariah dan Bank Konvensional di Indonesia. Jurnal Ekonomi Syariah, 10(2), 88–99.
  4. Hidayat, M., & Putri, S. (2021). Evaluasi Rasio Keuangan pada Bank Syariah di Indonesia. Jurnal Manajemen dan Bisnis Islam, 5(3), 123–134.
  5. Lestari, T., & Hidayat, R. (2020). Perbandingan Kinerja Keuangan Perbankan Syariah dan Konvensional. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan Islam, 6(1), 54–67.
  6. Moleong, L. J. (2021). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif (Edisi Revisi). Remaja Rosdakarya.
  7. Nugraha, R., & Akbar, F. (2020). Komparasi Kinerja Bank Syariah dan Bank Konvensional di Masa Pandemi. Jurnal Ilmu Ekonomi Terapan, 8(2), 101–112.
  8. Pratama, D., & Nugroho, A. (2020). Financial Ratio Analysis of Islamic and Conventional Banks: A Comparative Study. Indonesian Journal of Banking and Finance, 9(1), 45–60.
  9. Putra, B., & Ramadhan, Y. (2021). Rasio Keuangan sebagai Alat Ukur Kinerja Bank: Studi Perbandingan. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Islam, 4(2), 74–89.
  10. Rahman, F., & Sari, N. (2021). Analisis ROA dan BOPO Bank Umum Syariah dan Konvensional. Jurnal Manajemen Perbankan Syariah, 5(2), 67–79.
  11. Rahmawati, D., Idris, A., & Maulana, H. (2022). Profitabilitas dan Efisiensi Bank Syariah di Indonesia. Jurnal Keuangan Islam Modern, 6(3), 92–106.
  12. Sari, L., Putri, N., & Wibowo, H. (2022). Analisis Komparatif ROE dan NPL pada Bank Syariah dan Konvensional. Jurnal Akuntansi Syariah dan Keuangan Islam, 7(1), 33–47.
  13. Setiawan, B., & Wulandari, A. (2022). Dinamika Pertumbuhan Aset dan Kinerja Bank Syariah. Jurnal Perbankan Islam Indonesia, 8(1), 15–28.
  14. Siregar, R., & Rahmat, A. (2021). Stability and Profitability in Islamic and Conventional Banking. Journal of Financial Economics and Policy, 11(2), 99–114.
  15. Sugiyono. (2022). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif, Kuantitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.
  16. Wahyuni, E., Zain, R., & Fauzi, N. (2023). Efisiensi Perbankan di Indonesia: Studi Empiris terhadap Bank Syariah dan Konvensional. Jurnal Ekonomi Syariah Nusantara, 5(1), 51–66.
  17. Widodo, R., Kurniawan, T., & Basri, F. (2022). Evaluasi Likuiditas Bank Syariah dan Konvensional. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan Islam, 9(3), 110–123.
  18. Zulfikar, A., & Hafiz, R. (2020). Comparative Analysis of Islamic and Conventional Banks: Evidence from Indonesia. International Journal of Islamic Economics, 3(2), 67–78.