20% Americans are watching; the key to the next wave of growth in the crypto market is here

Written by: Kyle Saunders

Translated by: Chopper, Foresight News

Most research on cryptocurrencies revolves around a simple question: who owns them? Who doesn’t?

Admittedly, this is a reasonable starting point. Ownership behavior is observable and quantifiable. But for a market valued in the trillions of dollars, this may not be the most core issue.

If you’re interested in market development, regulatory policies, political opinions, or the future trajectory of crypto assets, a more relevant question might be: who is considering acquiring cryptocurrencies?

Because acceptance and adoption are never binary choices but gradual processes.

Focusing only on the final stage of this process causes you to miss the entire chain of transformation.

Reject → Consider → Hold: The three stages of cryptocurrency acceptance

Recently, Erin Fitz and I collaborated on a new paper, where we did not view cryptocurrency acceptance as a black-and-white outcome but defined it as a gradual process.

From late 2024 to 2025, we conducted three independent representative surveys of American adults. Based on the results, we divided respondents into three groups:

• Not holding and not considering holding cryptocurrencies
• Not holding but considering holding cryptocurrencies
• Currently holding cryptocurrencies

Our first straightforward yet crucial conclusion: about one in five Americans do not hold cryptocurrencies but are considering acquiring them.

This group is far from insignificant or a statistical anomaly, nor are they a “destined to hold” potential group. They are a distinct segment with unique psychological traits and behavioral patterns, making them critically important.

Why is the “potential holder” group so key?

Limiting research to a binary comparison of “holders” versus “non-holders” essentially assumes that all those not yet in the market are a homogeneous whole.

But real-world behavior choices are never like that.

The classic Theory of Planned Behavior in social psychology states that human actions evolve through a series of stages: beliefs, attitudes, perceived control, behavioral intentions. Only after “considering” does one develop “behavioral intention”; only with intention does one take action. And each stage does not necessarily lead to the next.

In other words, all current holders were once potential holders; but not all potential holders will ultimately become actual holders.

When we view people’s participation in cryptocurrencies as an ordered, gradual process rather than a binary trait, interesting conclusions emerge: the factors influencing “considering holding” are not exactly the same as those driving “actually holding.”

This transformation chain involves multiple layers of selection mechanisms.

What influences “considering holding”? What drives “actually holding”?

Some common influencing factors align with expectations: younger people, men, those more open to new experiences, and individuals with higher risk tolerance are more likely to cross the thresholds of “reject → consider” and “consider → hold.”

However, two sets of notable patterns deserve special attention.

Factors more strongly associated with “considering holding”:

• More conservative practical ideologies
• Support for AI technology development

These factors influence the early stages of cryptocurrency acceptance, explaining why some people are open to cryptocurrencies but may not take the final step to “actually hold.”

Factors more strongly associated with “actually holding”:

• Already owning stocks
• A desire for diversification

Risk tolerance is the most significant overall factor: as risk tolerance increases from low to high, the probability of choosing to hold cryptocurrencies rises dramatically—reducing the rejection rate by 32 percentage points and increasing actual holding probability by 27 percentage points.

Here is a brief summary of the key differences:

Our survey data aligns closely with the actual market landscape: Bitcoin dominates both the “potential” and “actual” holder groups (Ethereum is second), and many are willing to explore multiple cryptocurrencies. The market itself confirms this conclusion.

To understand how this pattern fits into broader technological diffusion curves—and why the “potential holder” stage will determine whether cryptocurrency development stalls or scales—comparing Bitcoin’s adoption trajectory with early internet diffusion offers insight. Survey data shows that by 2026, about 55% of Americans will have accepted AI technology.

Additionally, the chart in the paper illustrates how cryptocurrency acceptance aligns with Rogers’ innovation diffusion curve:

This is an adapted version of Rogers’ 2003 innovation diffusion curve, with the orange solid line representing an S-shaped cumulative distribution function (left axis). The blue shaded area under the curve depicts the probability distribution of the five adopter categories in Rogers’ model, based on standard deviations from the mean in a normal distribution. In this model:

• Innovators (2.5%, from 0 to 2 SD below the mean)
• Early adopters (13.5%, from 2 SD below to 1 SD below)
• Early majority (34%, from 1 SD below to the mean)
• Late majority (34%, from the mean to 1 SD above)
• Laggards (16%, from 1 SD above to 100%)

The black dashed lines show the self-reported cryptocurrency ownership rates in our three studies (Study 1: 13%, Study 2: 18%, Study 3: 32%).

The significance of these findings extends beyond the crypto field

While these results can be narrowly interpreted as consumer segmentation, they hold broader implications.

For market growth:

The expansion potential of the crypto market lies not in converting staunch “rejecters” into holders but in understanding what prevents potential holders from becoming actual holders. These barriers may not be ideological but could involve perceived behavioral control, concerns about market volatility, or liquidity issues.

For regulation:

If policymakers only see cryptocurrency holders as the politically influential group, they risk misjudging the market. Policy directions in digital assets are likely to depend on these open-minded yet undecided potential holders. Their preferences, risk profiles, and trust in institutions will be crucial, especially as crypto regulation frameworks mature around 2026.

For social opinion:

Online debates tend to polarize: either supporting or opposing cryptocurrencies. But our data shows a large, psychologically distinct middle group exists in reality. Historically, whether an innovation becomes widespread, stalls, or sparks backlash depends not on early adopters but on this middle segment.

Acceptance and adoption are inherently gradual processes

The core insight of this research is not limited to cryptocurrencies but applies to a shift in research methods and cognitive perspectives.

Simplifying complex behaviors into binary choices often confuses the different behavioral patterns at various stages. Factors that make people open to a new thing do not necessarily push them to take action.

This applies not only to cryptocurrencies but also to AI adoption, political participation, trust in institutions, and many other behavioral choices discussed in this column.

The overlooked middle stages often hide the most valuable behavioral insights.

Cryptocurrency acceptance and adoption are never purely a matter of personality traits or ideological signals but a step-by-step behavioral process.

Ignoring this “potential holder” intermediate stage leads to misjudging both market realities and the underlying political and social dynamics.