Legitimizing Bitcoin as a Currency and Store of Value: Using Discrete Monetary Units to Consolidate Value and Drive Market Growth
Cryptocurrency, and especially Bitcoin, has struggled to gain recognition as a legitimate currency from governments, financial institutions, and consumers. This has occurred because many analysts and consumers believe that Bitcoin is not a stable and consistent store of value, a unit of measurement, or a medium of exchange. One way to overcome this challenge is for Bitcoin to be used as both a currency and store of value by a greater percentage of the world’s population. This paper seeks to identify how a change in Bitcoin’s monetary measurement (or denomination) can more easily facilitate Bitcoin transactions to increase its use. Specifically, we posit that applying whole number bias theory, from the cognitive psychology and mathematics fields, to Bitcoin’s unit of measurement will allow the value of Bitcoin to be referenced in smaller and easier to
understand units with fewer numbers after the decimal point—such as the “Bit” or the “Satoshi.” In the process, the use of Bitcoin will include more whole numbers and allow the general public to more easily assign value to Bitcoin in day-to-day transactions.
Baur, D., Hong, K. “Bitcoin: Medium of Exchange or Speculative Assets?” Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions, and Money 54 177-189 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2017.12.004.
Cheah, E., Fry, J. “Speculative bubbles in Bitcoin markets? An empirical investigation into the fundamental value of Bitcoin.” Economics Letters 130 32-36 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.02.029.
DeWolf, M., Bassok, M. “From Rational Numbers to Algebra: Separable Contributions of Decimal Magnitude and Relational Understanding of Fractions.” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 133 72-84 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.01.013.
DeWolf, M., Vosniadou, S. “The Representation of Fraction Magnitudes and the Whole Number Bias Reconsidered.” Learning and Instruction 37 39-49 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.07.002.
Fields, B. “Securities and Exchange Commission (Release No. 34-83723; File No. SR-BatsBZX 2016-30).” Securities and Exchange Commission (2018) https://www.sec.gov/rules/other/2018/34-83723.pdf.
Gandal, N., Hamrick, J. T., Moore, T., Oberman, T. “Price Manipulation in the Bitcoin Ecosystem.” Journal of Monetary Economics 95 86-96 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2017.12.004.
Glaser, F., Zimmermann, K., Haferkorn, M., Weber, M. C., Siering, M. “Bitcoin - Asset or Currency? Revealing Users' Hidden Intentions.” Twenty Second European Conference on Information Systems (2014). Available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2425247.
Gutoski, G., Stebila, D. “Hierarchical Deterministic Bitcoin Wallets that Tolerate Key Leakage.” In Böhme, R., Okamoto, T. (Eds.) Financial Cryptography and Data Security. FC 2015. 497-504 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47854-7_31.
Kubat, M. “Virtual Currency Bitcoin in the Scope of Money Definition and Store of Value.” Procedia Economics and Finance 30 409-416 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212 5671(15)01308-8.
Lai, M., Wong, J. “Revisiting Decimal Misconceptions from a New Perspective: The Significance of Whole Number Bias in the Chinese Culture.” The Journal of Mathematical Behavior 47 96-108 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.07.00.
Li, X., Wang, C. “The Technology and Economic Determinants of Cryptocurrency Exchange Rates: The Case of Bitcoin.” Decision Support Systems 95 49-60 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss .2016.12.001.
Luther, J. “Bitcoin and the Future of Digital Payments.” The Independent Review 20 397-404 (2016) http://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_20_03_12_luther.pdf.
Madise, S. “Back to the Future: Evolving Forms of Money.” SSRN (2015) http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2622080.
Miller, K., Major, S. M., Shu, H., Zhang, H. “Original Knowledge: Number Names and Number Concepts in Chinese and English.” Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology. 54.2 129-139 (2000) https://doi.org /10.1037/h0087335.
Moore, E., Christin, N. “Beware the Middleman: Empirical Analysis of Bitcoin-Exchange Risk.” In Sadeghi, A. R. (Ed.) Financial Cryptography and Data Security FD 2013. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer 25-33 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39884-1_3.
Nakamoto, S. “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.” (2008) (accessed 30 January 2020) https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf.
Ni, Y., Zhou, Y. “Teaching and Learning Fraction and Rational Numbers: The Origins and Implications of Whole Number Bias.” Educational Psychologist 40 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4001_3.
No Author. “Top 100 Cryptocurrencies by Market Capitalization.” CoinMarketCap (accessed 10 February 2019) https://coinmarketcap.com/.
Obersteiner, A., Van Dooren, W., Van Hoof, J., Verschaffel, L. “The Natural Number Bias and Magnitude Representation in Fraction Comparison by Expert Mathematicians.” Learning and Instruction 28 64-72 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.003.
Roell, M., Viarouge, A., Houdé, O., Borst, H. “Inhibition of the Whole Number Bias in Decimal Number Comparison: A Developmental Negative Priming Study.” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 77 240-24 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2018.08.010.
Sedgwick, K. “It’s Time to Change the Way We Measure Bitcoin.” Bitcoin.com (accessed 16 December 2018) https://news.bitcoin.com/its-time-to-change-the-way-we-measure-bitcoin/.
u/armysatoru “r/Bitcoin: Isn't It About Time We Standardized mBTC as the Official Unit of Bitcoin?” Reddit. (accessed 12 February 2019) https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7a1psj/isnt_it_about_time_we_standardized_mbtc_as_the/.
u/brcreeker “r/Bitcoin: A Case for the Microbitcoin (uBTC) Satobitcoin (sBTC)” Reddit. (accessed 12 February 2019) https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rg2vw/a_case_for_the _microbitcoin_ubtc_satobitcoin_sbtc/.
Vamvakoussi, X. “Naturally Biased? In Search for Reaction Time Evidence for a Natural Number Bias in Adults.” The Journal of Mathematical Behavior 31.3 344-355 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2012.02.001.
Vasek, M., Thornton, M., Moore, T. “Empirical Analysis of Denial-of-Service Attacks in the Bitcoin Ecosystem.” In Böhme, R., Brenner, M., Moore, T., Smith, M. (Eds.) Financial Cryptography and Data Security. FC 2014. 57-71 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44774-1_5.
Copyright (c) 2020 Chad Albrecht, Steven Hawkins, Kristopher McKay Duffin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
- Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
- The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
- Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
- The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
- Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
- The Author represents and warrants that:
- the Work is the Author’s original work;
- the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
- the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
- the Work has not previously been published;
- the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
- the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
- The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
- The Author agrees to digitally sign the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work.
Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.