Factors influencing the intention to give zakāt on employment income: Evidence from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Aziz Ur Rehman; Aslam, Ejaz; Anam Iqbal Article Factors influencing the intention to give zakāt on employment income: Evidence from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Islamic Economic Studies (IES) Provided in Cooperation with: Islamic Development Bank Institute, Jeddah Suggested Citation: Aziz Ur Rehman; Aslam, Ejaz; Anam Iqbal (2021) : Factors influencing the intention to give zakāt on employment income: Evidence from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Islamic Economic Studies (IES), ISSN 2411-3395, Emerald, Bingley, Vol. 29, Iss. 1, pp. 33-49, https://doi.org/10.1108/IES-05-2020-0017 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/316478 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Factors influencing the intention to give zak at on employment income: evidence from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Aziz Ur Rehman IIUM Institute of Islamic Banking and Finance (IIiBF), International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Ejaz Aslam School of Islamic Economics, Banking and Finance (SIEBF), Minhaj University, Lahore, Pakistan, and Anam Iqbal IIUM Institute of Islamic Banking and Finance (IIiBF), International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Abstract Purpose –This study aims to apply the extended theory of planned behaviour (ETPB) to investigate the factors influencing the intention to give zak at on employment income. Design/methodology/approach –This study draws the required data through a survey in three main cities Makkah, Medina and Jeddah in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). The final data sample is consisting of 650 useable questionnaires to analyse the objective of this study. Findings –The study finds that moral norm, injunctive norm, descriptive norm and past behaviour have a significant influence on the intention to pay zak at on employment income. The perceived behavioural control and attitude have a negative and weak impact on the intention to give zak at on income. Research limitations/implications –The findings of this study can be useful for the policymakers and regulators to enhance peoples’awareness to give zak at to eradicate poverty and inequality in Muslim societies. zak at is for the deprived people, so the consequences of this study might help to improve their liveability. Originality/value –This study is unique because it identified the behavioural factors that affect the peoples’ intention to give zak at in KSA have yet to be profoundly explored in the literature. This study has gathered primary data and applied the ETPB to identify the factors influencing the zak at compliance behaviour in KSA. Keywords Theory of planned behaviour, Intention, Norms, Saudi Arabia, Zak at Paper type Research paper 1. Introduction Zak at is the third fundamental pillar of Islam that plays a crucial role in the redistribution of wealth to the less fortunate Muslim community to eradicate poverty (Ismail Abdel Mohsin, 2020). Zak at is an act of worship that encompasses not just the spiritual aspect but the sociofinancial dimension of individuals and society (Al-Qarad aw ı, 1999). Zak at is an essential instrument for social justice as it leads to increased prosperity in this world and increases the Intention to give zak at on employment income 33 JEL Classification —D21, G20, O16. KAUJIE Classification —E15, E14 © Aziz Ur Rehman, Ejaz Aslam and Anam Iqbal. Published in Islamic Economic Studies.Publishedby Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative CommonsAttribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode The authors are grateful to the anonymous referees and editor of the journal for their extremely useful suggestions to improve the quality of the article. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/1319-1616.htm Received 13 May 2020 Revised 15 August 2020 Accepted 9 November 2020 Islamic Economic Studies Vol. 29 No. 1, 2021 pp. 33-49 Emerald Publishing Limited e-ISSN: 2411-3395 p-ISSN: 1319-1616 DOI 10.1108/IES-05-2020-0017 religious merit (thawab) in the hereafter as its payment purifies individuals from sins (Dhar, 2013). On the subject of zak at, the Holy Qur’ an states: “Take from their wealth (O Prophet) charity to purify and bless them, and pray for them—surely your prayer is a source of comfort for them. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.”(Qur’ an 9:103). Zak at is closely linked with sadaqah and tax, but it has more importance than tax because it is mandatory, being a directive from Allah (SWT), whereas tax is imposed by the administrative authority (e.g. government). Thus, the responsibility of the local authority to utilize the zak at fund for the benefit of society like as childcare, food subsidy, education, health care, housing and public transportation for the poor (Awaliah-Kasri, 2013;Huda et al., 2012a,b). Despite knowing that zak at is a religious obligation, many deem paying zak at as an outflow of resources and wealth, but Islamic ideology considers it a purification and an increment in wealth (Muammar and Heikal, 2014). Zak at has lots of benefits individually as well as socially (Ismail Abdel Mohsin, 2020). Personally, it diminishes the tendency in one to be greedy and self-centred. Psychologically, it helps in reducing social inequalities in each society by transferring wealth from the affluent to the poor. Thus, zak at works against the concentration of wealth by redistributing it to the less-privileged segments of the society, which would immensely contribute to alleviating poverty (Ismail Abdel Mohsin, 2020). Furthermore, it creates opportunities to improve the life quality and condition of the Muslim Ummah as well as the society at large (Abdullah et al., 2015). Zak at is a critical mainstay of Islam that means dispensing an abundance of riches to the poor. Nevertheless, it is practised only by a small number of people due to lack of knowledge about various aspects of zak at (including weak understanding about the individual and collective responsibility regarding zak at), lack of socialization of the rich with the poor and lack of intention of the muzakki in cleansing his wealth and carrying out this as moral and social responsibility (Muammar and Heikal, 2014). With regard to the theory of reasoned action (TRA), attention is influenced by attitudes and injunctive norms (Bidin and Idris, 2009). Using the theory of planned behaviour (TPB), Sapingi et al. (2011) concluded that attitudes, perceived behavioural control and injunctive norms affected the person’s attention to pay zak at. Several studies use the same theory and get diversified results (Azman and Bidin, 2015; Huda et al., 2012a,b;Sihombing, 2015). Thus, the factor in identifying the intention to pay zak at stayed illusive, and the assessment of zak at quality needs further examination. So, for this purpose, the current study is empirically investigating the factors that affect the intention to pay zak at in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). This study contributes to the existing literature on zak at in several ways. First, this is the first study that applied extended theory of planned behaviour (ETPB) to identify the factors that affect the intention to give zak at in KSA. Moreover, the present research collectively employed all three norms together: the injunctive norm, the descriptive norm and the moral norm to evaluating the zak at compliance behaviour, which is ignored by the past literature. Thus, the finding of this study provides more comprehensive guidelines to strengthen the policies for the collection and distribution of zak at in KSA. Second, most of the prior empirical studies on zak at are predominantly focussing on Malaysia, Pakistan and Indonesia. Thus, this study extended the understanding of zak at in the Middle East. Finally, on an individual level, the contribution of this study will raise awareness and motivation to the Saudi Muslims to pay zak at as Muslims areobliged to promote what is right and wrong. To the best of our knowledge, the current study is novel as this is the only empirical investigation carried out so far to identify the influential factors that are affecting the intention of the Muslims of KSA to pay zak at. The remaining parts of the article are organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the related literature on zak at compliance behaviour and formulates the hypothesis. Section 3 details the research methodology, and section 4 explains the empirical results and discussion. Section 5 presents the conclusion of the study. IES 29,1 34 2. Literature review 2.1 Zak at in Islam Zak at is one of the fundamental pillars of Islam; therefore, it is mandatory for every Muslim. Muslims are required to give a specific percentage of their wealth to some designated and rightful beneficiaries of zak at. The word zak at is mentioned very clearly in the Holy Qur’ an (in 19 Suras and 32 Verses) and clarified in H ˙ad ıth. The recipients of zak at have also been elaborately enumerated in the Holy Qur’ an as follows: “Zak at expenditures are only for the poor, needy, employed to collect [Zak at], bringing hearts together [for Islam], freeing captives [or slaves], those in debt, cause of Allah, [stranded] traveller –an obligation [imposed] by Allah, and Allah is Knowing and Wise”(Qur’ an, 9:60). As one of the main pillars, zak at payment and distribution are mandatory in Islam. Islam is a religion that promotes social justice in all aspects that is only within a person’s capacity. For this reason, there are specific criteria (i.e. nisab and haul) for the obligation of zak at on every person. The first set of rules for paying zak at is for a person to reach puberty, to be sane and to be a free Muslim. Once those conditions are fulfilled, then the person’s wealth should also enter the nisab requirement, i.e. the minimum amount of wealth required for paying zak at, which is equivalent to the market value of 87.5 g of gold or 612 g of silver or equal amount any of the gold and silver. It should be noted that not all forms of wealth are liable for zak at. Agricultural products and livestock, mineral, marine products, jewellery, gold, trade and money which reach or which are more than the nisab are liable for zak at. Likewise, wealth should be growing or has the potential to develop for it to be eligible for zak at (AlQarad aw ı, 1999). 2.2 Factors affecting zak at compliance behaviour TPB is an extension of the theory of reasoned action and was proposed by Taib et al. (1991), which predict the link between attitudes and behaviour. Taib et al. (1991) added perceived behavioural control and subjective norms to assess the particular behaviour. TPB is considered as one of the most commonly used theories to explain and predict the behaviour (Huda et al., 2012a,b). Thus, a gap remains between intention and action caused principally by the individuals who express a positive expectation to practice yet do not act. Therefore, additional variables (past behaviour (PB), attitude (ATT), descriptive norm (DN), injunctive norm (IN), moral norm (MN) and perceived behavioural control (PBC) were introduced in the ETPB to improve TPB’s explanatory power of the behaviour (Andam and Osman, 2019; Muammar and Heikal, 2014;Mukhibad et al., 2019;Sapingi et al., 2011). Therefore, the present study evaluates ATT, PBC, IN, DN, MN and PB to analyse the intention to pay zak at. 2.2.1 Attitude. ATT is a psychological tendency based on one’s beliefs to help needy people (Shook and Bratianu, 2010). The past prominent studies found several factors that are affecting the ATT to pay zak at (Huda et al., 2012a,b;Kashif et al., 2018;Kashif and De-Run, 2015;Linden, 2011). The ETPB stipulates that attitude influences intention to give zak at, which implies that an individual with a positive attitude towards paying zak at is more likely to have the purpose of paying zak at on their wealth. It is supported by several prior studies which conclude that a positive attitude to give zak at translates into an intention to give zak at (Saad and Haniffa, 2014;Saad et al., 2020;Muammar and Heikal, 2014;Rehman et al., 2021). Based on this reason, the following hypothesis is developed. H1. Attitude has a positive influence on the intention of paying zak at. 2.2.2 Perceived behaviour. Based on the ETPB, PBC has a significant influence on the intention to give zak at. While people who have PBC over paying zak at from their employment income are more likely to have the intention to give zak at (Bin-Nashwan et al.,2020;Saad et al., 2020). There Intention to give zak at on employment income 35 aremixedresultsonthisfindingfromthepreviousstudies.Knowles et al. (2012) and Linden (2011) found that the easier it is to donate, the more likely the person is to intend to give zak at. In contrast, some studies found a significant influence of PBC on the intention to give zak at (Huda et al., 2012a,b;Saad et al.,2020;Kashif and De-Run, 2015;Muammar and Heikal, 2014). Therefore, based on the ETPB and the findings of prior studies, the present research formulated the following hypotheses: H2. Perceived behavioural control has a positive influence on the intention of paying zak at. 2.2.3 Injunctive norms. The IN are one’s perceptions and assumptions about others’ expectations of specific behaviours that one will or will not perform. According to ETPB, normative components (i.e. IN, DN and MN) influence the intention to give zak at (Sapingi et al., 2011). The assumption holds that the more perceived social pressure by the underlined group (injunctive norm), the more a person is likely to provide zak at from their employment income (Huda et al., 2012a,b). Kashif and De-Run (2015) in Malaysia found that the perceived social pressure influences the intention to donate money in the context of Muslim majority countries like Malaysia. Besides, some studies found an insignificant relationship between the IN and the intention to pay zak at (Linden, 2011). Thus, the relationship between IN and intention to pay zak at is still unclear. Therefore, based on the ETPB, the present study proposes the following hypotheses: H3. Injunctive norm positively influences the intention of paying zak at. 2.2.4 Descriptive norms. Based on ETPB, DN perceive that the reference group committed to pay zak at (Haji-Othman and Alwi, 2017). In this case, the higher the perception, the more likely a person would emulate the behaviour intention to pay zak at. The study conducted by Andam and Osman (2019) stated that the DN have a significant effect on the intention to pay zak at on employment income. It shows the higher the perception, the more likely a person would emulate the behaviour intention to pay zak at.Zak at is not only motivated by religious factor but also by self-satisfaction and organizational factors (Bin-Nashwan et al., 2020). In contrast, some studies showed an insignificant relationship between DN and the intention to give zak at albeit in the context of the Southeast Asian countries (Kashif and De-Run, 2015) and advanced countries such as England (Linden, 2011) and Australia (Smith and McSweeney, 2007). However, consistent with the ETPB and the general view of previous studies, the present study developed the following hypothesis. H4. Descriptive norms positively influence the intention of paying zak at. 2.2.5 Moral norms. MN posit that paying zak at is a personal responsibility of a person to help others in need. Moral norms depend on ethics, which are perceived as right or wrong (Andam and Osman, 2019). Moreover, MN can be decisively having a specific influence on intention. Linden (2011) stated that MN have the most substantial influence on intention. Several studies on charitable paying behaviour also affirmed that moral norms have a significant impact on the intention to pay zak at, particularly in the context of Malaysia (Kashif and DeRun, 2015) and in Australia (Knowles et al., 2012;Smith and McSweeney, 2007). This study, hence, extends prior research in investigating the MN relationship with zak at compliance behaviour. Thus, based on the ETPB, the present study constructed the following hypotheses: H5. Moral norms have a positive influence on the intention of paying zak at. 2.2.6 Past behaviour. ETPB explains that past behaviour shows the person engagement in paying zak at in the past, thus the higher the likelihood to intend to repeat the same action in the present. The prior studies have employed PB in predicting charitable paying behaviour IES 29,1 36 (Muammar and Heikal, 2014). The finding of several studies confirmed that the more a person had given charity in the past, the more it is likely for that person to repeat the same behaviour in future (Kashif and De-Run, 2015;Knowles et al., 2012;Smith and McSweeney, 2007). Likewise, studies on zak at compliance behaviour asserted that there is a significant positive correlation between PB and the intention to give zak at. This implies that those who had engaged in the behaviour of paying zak at in the past are likely to have the intention to pay zak at (Muammar and Heikal, 2014). Therefore, consistent with the ETPB and the findings discussed above, the present study formulated the following hypotheses: H6. Past behaviour has a positive influence on the intention of paying zak at. Most of the researchers are examining the behaviour to pay zak at by investigating the demographic variables such as age, gender, education, marital status, income and several dependents that are influencing on the intention to pay zak at (Hassan et al., 2013). Also, the study on zak at compliance has identified several factors that comply with the theory of TRA (Bidin and Idris, 2009) and TPB (Huda et al., 2012a, b). Most of the studies on zak at compliance are from Malaysia (Mustafa et al., 2013), Indonesia (Awaliah Kasri, 2013;Huda et al., 2012a,b; Muammar and Heikal, 2014), Pakistan (Ahmad et al., 2018;Suhaib, 2009) and Bangladesh (Belal and Ali, 2013). However, only a few studies are available that investigate the zak at compliance behaviour of the Muslims in KSA (Ummulkhayr et al., 2017). Thus, the current study attempts to fill the gap in the literature by testing the ETPB with the most recent primary data from three main cities of KSA to investigate the actual factors that affect zak at compliance behaviour. ETPB is unique because it added several factors like PB, IN and descriptive norm that are influences on the intention to pay zak at rigorously (Muammar and Heikal, 2014;Sapingi et al., 2011). Moreover, KSA is the birthplace of Islam and should be an example to the other Muslim majority countries in terms of the institutionalization of zak at and compliance. To the best of our knowledge, there is minimal literature on factors affecting the intention to give zak at in the KSA. Therefore, the present study evaluates ATT, PB, IN, DN, MN and PB that are affecting the intention to pay zak at in Figure 1. 3. Research methodology 3.1 Sample Keeping aligned with the research objectives, the data for this study were collected via questionnaires distributed in an online survey. This method is relatively economical and offers more convenience to the respondents (Rowley, 2014). A total of 900 questionnaires were distributed to employees of the various institutions, including private schools, state universities and different government offices such as the Department of Islamic Institution and Islamic Community, private institutions and Islamic Development Bank (IsDB) in three main cities Makah, Medina and Jeddah in KSA. A total of 697 questionnaires were retrieved, among which 650 are useable for the data analysis. The response rate is 77%, which is acceptable for data analysis. The details on the distribution and collection of questionnaires are presented in Table 1. 3.2 Research instrument The study adapted various questions from previous studies (Haji-Othman et al., 2017;Kashif and De Run, 2015;Saad et al., 2010). The questionnaire is organized into two sections. The first section focuses on the demographic variables. Section two is categorized into seven subsections for all items (attitude, perceived behaviour control, injunctive norms, descriptive norms, moral norms, past behaviour and behaviour intentions). This study used five-point Likert scales (for example, 1 5strongly disagree, 5 5strongly agree) to ask the response of Intention to give zak at on employment income 37 the respondents. In the first subsection, the factor “attitude”to pay zak at is measure through eight items adopted from (Saad et al., 2010). Secondly, the PBC adapted from the Haji-Othman et al. (2017) encapsulated five different elements. Third and fourth, the IN (perceived social pressure by a relevant group) and DN (the perception that the mattered group gives zak at) have four items each. Fifth and sixth, MN and PB intention measured, adopted from Kashif and De Run (2015), have four and five items, respectively. In the last section, the intention to pay zak at comprises of five items. The questionnaire is displayed in Table A1. 3.3 Model specification and econometric model This study employed the standard multiple regression to analyse the factors that affect the intention to give zak at on employment income. Standard multiple regression is used because it can determine the relative influence of various factors to the intention to give zak at and also has the ability to identify the outliers and anomalies. Furthermore, autocorrelation also identified through the Durbin Watson and also recognized the reliability and validity of the data. To examine the factors that affect the intention to give zak at (H1–H6), the following regression model is developed: Attitude Perceived Behaviour Control Injunctive Norms Descriptive Norms Moral Norms Past Behaviours Intention to pay zakāt Department/Agency Distributed Collected Response rate Academic institutions 270 221 81% Private institutions 300 241 80% Islamic banks 150 109 72% Government institutions 180 126 70% Total 900 697 77% Figure 1. Theoretical framework Table 1. Distributed and collected questionnaires IES 29,1 38 INTi¼ α 0þβ1ATTiþβ2PBCiþB3INiþB4DNiþB5MNiþB6PBiþ ε i where α is the intercept, icorresponds to respondents. INT refers to behaviour intention. ATT refers to the attitude, PBC refers to the perceived behaviour control, IN refers to the injunctive norms, DN refers to descriptive norms, MN refers to moral norms, PB refers to the past behaviour and erefers to the error term. 4. Results and discussion 4.1 Descriptive statistics Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics of dependent and independent variables. The mean and standard deviation (SD) value of attitude are 4.68 and 0.69, respectively. This result implies that the Muslims in KSA have a favourable attitude towards paying zak at. The mean and SD value of perceiving behaviour are 4.23 and 0.63, which represent that the employees perceived themselves to have control over the payment of zak at on their wealth. The mean and SD value of injunctive norm are 4.31 and 0.62, respectively, implying that most of the respondents are perceived to have the most influential social pressure to give zak at on their income. The mean and SD value of DN, at 4.22 and 0.64, indicate that most of the reference group gives zak at on their wealth. Similar to the IN, the majority of the people have the mean score of 4.31 and 0.62, indicating a high intention to pay zak at on their income. The mean and SD value of MN are 4.54 and 0.51, which is relatively high and suggests that employees in KSA were paying zak at as their moral responsibility to help others. Regarding PB, the mean and SB value are 4.05 and 0.76, showing that the people have given zak at on their income in the past. Lastly, the mean and SD value of intention are 4.19 and 0.68, which indicates that employees in KSA have strong intention to give zak at on their income. 4.2 Reliability test Table 3 shows the internal consistency, internal reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. The composite reliability is within an acceptable range (0.77–0.91) and all the AVE values are more than 0.5. Moreover, concerning Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, all the values are above the threshold level of 0.7. Overall, the results show that the entire values are valid and reliable for analysis (Wooldridge, 2010). 4.3 Correlation matrix Table 4 shows that ATT, DN and PB positively and highly correlated with intention. MN and IN have a positive but moderate correlation with intention. In contrast, PBC has a positive and weak correlation with the intention. The range of the collinearity shows that there is no severe problem of collinearity in the model because all variables are less than 0.8. Besides, there is no Variables Number of respondents Mean Std. Deviation Attitude 650 4.68 0.69 Perceived behavioural control 650 4.23 0.63 Injunctive norm 650 4.31 0.62 Descriptive norm 650 4.22 0.64 Moral norm 650 4.54 0.51 Past behaviour 650 4.05 0.76 Intention 650 4.19 0.68 Table 2. Descriptive statistics Intention to give zak at on employment income 39 multicollinearity issue in the data, none of the variance inflation factor (VIF) is more than the utilized edge level of 10 (Wooldridge, 2010). 4.4 Multiple regression Table 5 shows that the value of adjusted R-square explains 67% of the variation in the intention to give zak at, and there is no issue of autocorrelation among the variables. The results show that DN, PB, MN and IN have a positive and statistically significant relationship with the intention to give zak at. In contrast, PBC and ATT have a negative and statistically significant relationship with the intention to pay zak at. The results indicate that H1 and H2 Variables Number of items Composite reliability Cronbach’s alpha AVE Attitude 8 0.83 0.94 0.73 Perceived behavioural control 5 0.87 0.93 0.65 Injunctive norm 5 0.82 0.86 0.72 Descriptive norm 5 0.83 0.84 0.66 Moral norm 4 0.76 0.87 0.65 Past behaviour 4 0.84 0.85 0.75 Intention 5 0.85 0.90 0.77 Variables BI ATT PBC DN MN In PB BI 1 ATT 0.552 ** 1 PBC 0.232 ** 0.673 ** 1 DN 0.647 ** 0.451 ** 0.392 ** 1 MN 0.445 ** 0.562 ** 0.451 ** 0.491 ** 1 IN 0.457 ** 0.648 ** 0.543 ** 0.390 ** 0.672 ** 1 PB 0.764 ** 0.567 ** 0.464 ** 0.571 ** 0.491 ** 0.523 ** 1 Variance inflation factor 2.32 1.90 2.41 2.23 3.22 2.56 Note(s): BI, intention; ATT, attitude; PBC, perceived behaviour control; DN, descriptive norm; MN, moral norms; IN, injunctive norms; PB, past behaviour and **p< 0.05 (2-tailed) Variables Beta T-Stats Sig Decision (Constant) 0.523 2.15 0.031** Attitude 0.163 1.832 0.065* Not Supported Perceived behaviour control 0.312 5.364 0.000*** Not Supported Injunctive norms 0.286 4.548 0.000*** Supported Descriptive norm 0.610 7.559 0.000*** Supported Moral norms 0.223 2.586 0.008** Supported Past behaviour 0.257 3.325 0.001*** Supported F-statistic 79.76 R-Square 0.694 Prob. (F-stat) 0.000 b Adjusted R-Square 0.672 Durbin–Watson 2.06 Standard Error of Estimate 0.4235 Note(s):*p> 0.05; **p> 0.1; ***p> 0.001 Table 3. Internal consistency, reliability and convergent validity Table 4. Correlations matrix of regressors Table 5. Multiple regression analysis of intention to give zak at IES 29,1 40 Appendix (Survey Questions for the Factors Affecting zakāt Compliance in Makkah, Medina, and Jeddah) We seek your kind cooperation to complete this questionnaire. We thank you for the time spent to provide the valuable information Secon 1: Demography 1. Age 20-30 41-50 31-40 51-60 and more. 2. Gender Male Female 3. Marital Status Single Widower/divorced Married 4. Level of Income 2,000-3,000 3,100-5,000 5,100-10,000 Above 10,000 5. Educaonal Aainment Bachelor’s Degree Doctorate Degree Master’s Degree Others Professional Degree Secon 2: Atude: Paying zakāt on your income in the next year would be: Unpleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Pleasant Useless 12345 Useful Unsasfying 1 2 3 4 5 Sasfying Unfavourable 1 2 3 4 5 Favourable Negave 12345 Posive Bad 1 2 3 4 5 Good Inconsiderable 1 2 3 4 5 Considerable Pointless 1 2 3 4 5 Important Secon 3: Perceived Behavioural Control 1. If I wanted to, I could easily give zakāt in the next year strongly disagree 12345 strongly agree 2. Overall, how much control do you have over whether you give zakāt in the next year no control 12345complete control 3. It is mostly up to me whether I give zakāt in the next year not at all true 12345 absolutely true (continued)Table A1. Questionnaire Intention to give zak at on employment income 47 4. How confident are you that you will be able to give zakāt in the next year not at all confident 12345extremely confident 5. Giving zakāt in the next year is easy for me to do not at all true 12345 absolutely true Secon 4: Injuncve norms 1. Think of the people important to you. What percentage of them do you think would disapprove of you giving zakāt (1= 0%, 2= 20%, 3=60%, 4=80% 5= 100%) 2. The people closest to me would support me in giving zakāt in the next year not at all true 12345 absolutely true 3. The people closest to me would disapprove if I give zakāt in the next year very unlikely 12345 very likely 4. Most people who are important to me think that giving zakāt in the next year would be undesirable 12345 Desirable 5. Would the people closest to you approve or disapprove of giving zakāt in the next year strongly disapprove 12345strongly approve 6. If I give zakāt in the next year, the people closest to me would strongly disapprove 12345strongly approve Secon 5: Descripve norms 1. Think of those people important to you. What percentage of them do you think give zakāt (1= 0%, 2= 20%, 3=60%, 4=80% 5= 100%) 2. Most people who are important to me give zakāt strongly disagree 12345 strongly agree 3. Those people closest to me do not give zakāt strongly disagree 12345 strongly agree 4. How likely is ior those close to you to give zakāt? extremely unlikely 12345 extremely likely Secon 6: Moral Norms 1. I am the kind of person who gives zakāt strongly disagree 12345 strongly agree 2. I would feel guilty if I did not give zakāt very unlikely 12345 very likely 3. I believe I have a moral obligaon to give zakāt strongly disagree 12345 strongly agree 4. Not giving zakāt goes against my principles strongly disagree 12345 strongly agree Table A1. (continued) IES 29,1 48 Corresponding author Ejaz Aslam can be contacted at: [email protected]om For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] Secon 7: Past behaviour (5 items) 1. I do not give zakāt not at all true 12345 very true 2. Over the past year, I did not give zakāt not at all true 12345 very true 3. It is unusual for me to give zakāt strongly disagree 12345 strongly agree 4. I usually give zakāt not at all true 12345 very true 5. How oen do you pay zakāt? not at all 12345 Frequently Secon 8: intenon 1. I will give zakāt in the next year definitely not 12345 Definitely 2. I would like to give zakāt in the next year not at all 12345 Definitely 3. I do not intend to give zakāt in the next year strongly disagree 12345 strongly agree 4. I intend to give zakāt in the next year strongly disagree 12345 strongly agree 5. How likely is it for you to give zakāt in the next year? very unlikely 12345 very likely --Thank You-- Table A1. Intention to give zak at on employment income 49