Digital Payments Adoption: An Analysis of Literature
Pushp Patil, Yogesh Dwivedi, Nripendra Rana
To cite this version:
Pushp Patil, Yogesh Dwivedi, Nripendra Rana. Digital Payments Adoption: An Analysis of Literature.
16th Conference on e-Business, e-Services and e-Society (I3E), Nov 2017, Delhi, India. pp.61-70,
�10.1007/978-3-319-68557-1_7�. �hal-01768529�
HAL Id: hal-01768529
[Link]
Submitted on 17 Apr 2018
HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de
teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés.
Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License
Digital Payments Adoption: An Analysis of Literature
Pushp P. Patil, Yogesh K. Dwivedi1, Nripendra P. Rana
Emerging Markets Research Centre (EMaRC), School of Management, Swansea University
Bay Campus, Swansea, SA1 8EN, UK
{Email: Pushpppatil@[Link]; [Link]@[Link];
[Link]@[Link]}
Abstract. Digital payments (mainly enabled by mobile devices) have huge
potential to change lives of millions of people in developing countries by
offering financial services to the unbanked masses. Despite its potential digital
payment methods have not been widely and successfully adopted in the
developing countries. In order to ascertain the various drivers and inhibitors
behind digital payment adoption, this study did a review of research on digital
and mobile payment adoption and use. Results of this literature analysis
revealed performance expectancy/perceived usefulness as most significant
determinant of consumer’s behavioral intention to use mobile payments
followed by perceived ease of use (PEOU). Perceived risk was found as major
inhibitor to the adoption of mobile payments. Also majority of studies
employed TAM and its extension to understand consumer adoption to mobile
payment followed by UTAUT.
Keywords: Adoption, Cashless Payments, Digital Payments, Diffusion,
Literature Review, Mobile Payments, TAM, UTAUT
1 Introduction
Internet has changed the way business is conducted in recent years in terms of
wireless communication. This emerging trend is more powerful than anything internet
used to offer before as this allows consumers an anywhere and anytime paradigm [1].
In the history of mankind no other innovation has influenced the lives of people in
ways as Mobile devices [2]. These hand held devices have gradually shifted daily
activities from real world circumstances to mobile phone-based virtual world. In the
entire consumer technology adoption history the rate of adoption of Mobile phone
was the fastest and to the deepest level [3].
The global spread and use of mobile devices provide prominent role to digital
payments in the payment market. This wide penetration of mobile devices bring world
of opportunities to transform the manner in which people manage and move money
through secure mobile transactions [4]. Consumers are slowly moving towards
changing their payment method from traditional ways to contactless devices due to
emergence of these new mobile and other digital payment technologies. The rapid
development in technology has enabled innovation in payment methods resulting in
1 Corresponding author
applications such as Near Field Communication (NFC), mobile wallets, P2P apps,
quick response code and wearable [5].
Despite their popularity as an emerging service mobile payments have not as
widely adopted as expected in the developing countries [4]. This could to attribute to
the fact that in the developed countries Mobile Payment systems have to compete
with range of alternative payment methods with longstanding history [6]. However,
the scenario is quite different in the emerging markets. Mobile Payments are readily
accepted in the countries like Kenya and Philippines where penetration of formal
banking system is low [7].
Given the background, it is undoubted mobile payments have potential to bring
financial inclusion especially in the emerging markets by offering financial services to
the unbanked masses and improve their lives for better. Recently there have been
huge drives to promote various digital payment systems including mobile payments
by Government of India (GoI) for enhancing transparency in financial transactions,
reducing tax envision and improving public welfare and delivery systems. GoI has not
only made variety of digital payment systems available to cater need of all segments
(affluent vs. non affluent; rural vs. urban) of society, but widespread training and
financial incentives also offered to equip and encourage people to use these systems.
Despite the advantages of digital payment systems and widespread promotion there is
reluctance among consumers to use various digital payment systems including mobile
payment not only in India but also in other countries. This provides motivation and
relevance to undertake research in this area. An examination of existing literature
suggest that a number of studies have already been conducted to examine factors
influencing mobile payments adoption largely in the context of developed countries
and there are some in developing countries context. Before undertaking any further
empirical work on this topic, it was deemed appropriate to undertake review of
existing studies for synthesizing the results reported, identifying their limitations and
directions of further work in this important and emerging area.
Considering the discussion presented above, the aim of this study is to undertake
analysis and synthesis of relevant research exist on issues related to the mobile
payments adoption. In order to achieve this, the remaining part of this submission is
structured as follows: next section briefly describe literature search and analysis
approach followed by a brief review relevant studies is presented in Section 3. Section
4 briefly outlines the main limitations of existing work followed by future research
directions in Section 5 and finally, key conclusions are outlined in the last section.
2 Literature Search Approach
It was deemed appropriate to do keyword search in order to achieve objectives of
this research. This study utilized following keywords to undertake search for relevant
work using the Scopus database: “Digital Payment” OR “Cashless Payment” OR
“Mobile Payment” OR “Adoption” OR “Acceptance” OR “Diffusion” OR “Usage”
OR “Intention” OR “Success” OR “Satisfaction” in order to identify papers relevant
to digital payment. The keyword search returned 109 articles. We were able to
download 47 full articles. Then Adobe Reader’s advanced search function was
employed using keywords such as “consumer” and “adoption” for all 47 full articles
on mobile payment in order to narrow down articles on consumer adoption of mobile
payment. The downloaded mobile payment articles were deemed to be relevant for
this study if they met one of the following two criteria: (1) the data collection of
research took place among consumers, or (2) the studies developed conceptual model
to be empirically tested on consumers at later stage. The articles were screened out if
the data was collected from merchants or focusing on organizations aspect. In the end
21 papers were found relevant for inclusion in this review. This study looked into
these 21 articles which specifically focused on consumer adoption of mobile payment.
Then a detailed review of these articles was conducted to identify theories utilized in
this area and various drivers and inhibitors of mobile payment.
3 Systematic Literature and Findings
This section presents review summary of mobile payment adoption research. The
review is classified broadly under two categories: 1) frequently used theories in
research addressing consumer adoption of mobile payment; and 2) drivers and
inhibitors of mobile payment adoption.
3.1 Frequently used theories in consumer Mobile payment adoption
A large number of Information Technology (IT)/Information Systems (IS) projects
and systems continue to fail leading to adverse impact of such investments on
individuals, organizations and society [8, 9, 10]. This provides reasonable impetus to
researchers for repeatedly examining factor influencing adoption and use of new
technologies and systems in the contexts of individual, organization and society.
Consequently, multiple theories have been employed in IS field to determine
individual technology acceptance in various use contexts. Table 1 reveals frequently
used theories for understanding issues related to consumer adoption of mobile
payment systems. These studies were either used standalone or in combination with
other dominant technology adoption theories and models.
With 14 studies Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and its extension have
been most utilized technology adoption theory/model in this domain. These studies
adopted, adapted and extended TAM across various use contexts. For instance the
study by Augsburg & Hedman [2] utilized TAM alongside with Innovation Diffusion
Theory (IDT) to explore adoption of mobile payments and value added services
(VAS). Whereas Zhang et al. [11] employed TAM standalone to explore factors
affecting the adoption of mobile payment in particular cultural settings. The Unified
Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) emerged as the second most
utilized theory (originating from Venkatesh et al. [34]) with five studies employing it.
Slade et al. [6] utilized UTAUT to examine consumer adoption of proximity mobile
payments in the UK and Zhong et al. [11] utilized it to examine consumer adoption of
mobile payments in China. This is followed by Diffusion of Innovation Theory (DOI)
utilized thrice in studies including Pham & Ho [12] who examined consumer adoption
of NFC-based mobile payments. IDT was employed on two occasions by Augsburg &
Hedman [4] and Zhong et al. [11]. More than 50% of studies reviewed by Slade et al.
[20] have drawn on Davis’ (1989) TAM as a theoretical base.
The remaining four theories/models were employed only once. The study of
Keramati et al. [13] employed combinative model of Mallat N. factors (2007) [14]
and Dahlberg and Oorni Factor model (2007) [35] to explore factors affecting
'mobile'-payment services adoption, whereas Kapoor et al. [15] utilized Tornatzky
and Klein’s theory and Moore and Benbasat’s perceived characteristics of innovating
theory to determine adoption of the interbank mobile payment service and finally
Gong et al. [16] utilized trust based acceptance model to study the effects of cognitive
and emotional trust on mobile payment adoption.
Table 1. Frequently used theories and model in consumer Mobile payment adoption.
Theory/Model Freq Citations
TAM 14 [4], [11], [17], [21], [22], [23], [24],
[25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [33].
UTAUT 5 [6], [19], [20], [21], [33]
DOI 3 [12], [15], [19]
IDT 3 [4], [15], [33]
Mallat (2007) 1 [13]
Dahlberg and Oorni Factor (2007)
Tornatzky & Klein (1982) 1 [15]
Trust based acceptance model [38] 1 [16]
LEGEND: DOI: Diffusions of Innovations Theory; IDT: Innovation Diffusion
Theory; TAM: Technology Acceptance Model; UTAUT: Unified Theory of
Acceptance and Use of Technology
3.2 Drivers and Inhibitors of Mobile Payment Adoption
Review also revealed that majority of the studies have reported performance
expectancy (PE) construct from UTAUT and perceived usefulness (PU) from TAM as
most significant determinant of consumer’s behavioral intention to use mobile
payments whereas perceived risk was found as inhibitor to the adoption of mobile
payments. Study of Augsburg & Hedman [4] on value added services (VAS) and
adoption of mobile payments found PU can influence the consumer intention to adopt
mobile payments. Consumers see payment process being easier and more efficient
when VAS is integrated with the mobile payment service. Compatibility and
convenience were also found as critical factors of intention to adopt mobile payments
[4].
Other studies that have reported PE/PU as major predictor of consumer mobile
payments were Chandrasekhar & Nandagopal [17]; Koenig-Lewis et al. [18]; Oliveira
et al. [19]; Pham & Ho [12]; Slade et al. [20]; Slade et al. [21]. Apart from PU the
study of Chandrasekhar & Nandagopal [17] found consumers will adopt mobile
payment use behavior if it fits into their lifestyle. Whereas Koenig-Lewis et al. [18]
study revealed social influence and perceived enjoyment can reduce perceived risk of
using mobile payment.
Four studies [22], [23], [13], [24] have reported Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) as
major driver to consumer mobile payment adoption. These studies found in terms of
consumers’ willingness to adapt to mobile payment, the impact of usability issues are
more important than those pertaining to usefulness. In addition to PEOU, the study of
[23] noted that implementation of mobile payment technology needs substantial
considerations in terms of infrastructure availability, partnerships between various
stakeholders such as banks and phone operators and quality of the business model.
Whereas, Keramati et al. [13] revealed an interesting lifestyle as a driver for adoption,
finding people who travel often and reside in other countries are more inclined to use
M-payment services.
Apart from PEOU and PU the following studies found other significant drivers of
consumer mobile payment adoption. Liébana-Cabanillas et al. [25] and Liébana-
Cabanillas et al. [26] have reported role of external influence (that is derived from the
social influence and subjective norms) as the strongest driver of consumer adoption
towards mobile payment. Gao & Waechter [27] found perceived information quality,
perceived system quality, and perceived service quality as major drivers of initial trust
formation while examining user adoption of mobile payment services. Emotional
trust was found to have stronger effect on consumers’ intention to use mobile
payment [16]. Moreover, Hossain & Mahmud [28] results found cognitive style
significantly related to perceived ease of use in determining mobile payment
adoption. Whereas Kapoor et al. [15] found Rogers’ diffusion of innovation attributes
as significant predicator for determining adoption of the interbank mobile payment
service in India and Lee et al. [29] found perceived benefits as significant factor of
mobile payment service acceptance.
Perceived risk (PR) was found as inhibitor by majority of the studies. Andreev et
al. Andreev et al. [22] found PR as a major inhibitor of user willingness to M-Pay for
LBS. They also found magnitude of PR’s negative impact could be at least twice the
magnitude of any other positive driver’s impact. Apart from Andreev et al. [22]
studies such as Koenig-Lewis et al. [18], Liébana-Cabanillas et al. [25], Pham & Ho
[12], Slade et al. [20] and Slade et al. [6] also found Perceived risk as the major
inhibitor to consumer adoption to mobile payment. Whereas, Augsburg & Hedmann
[4] found an interesting fact that insignificant effect of VAS on Perceived Ease of Use
can become an inhibitor. Apart from PR, perceived uncertainty was found as major
initial trust inhibitor that exerts a significant negative effect on building initial trust in
user adoption of mobile payment services. Information privacy is another inhibitor to
consumer adoption of mobile payment services for “fintech”. Whereas network
externalities, security, and payment transaction information were found as major
inhibitors to consumers ‘mobile’-payment services adoption by Keramati et al. [13].
4 Research Limitations
Augsburg & Hedman [4] research on value added service (VAS) and mobile
payment have chosen three VAS but does not differentiate between them and presents
them all to the experimental group. Limitation of this study is that VAS offer different
value propositions and different consumers may be more attracted to some
propositions than others. Gao & Waechter [27] examined the role of initial trust in
user adoption of mobile payment service empirically in Australia which, in terms of
national characteristics, is different from other mobile technology advancing nations
such as South Korea, Japan, and Finland. Also, the results of this study may or may
not be applicable to emerging markets context such as India. Individual user
characteristics is also a factor which might affect but not been used in this study. The
study examined initial trust formation, which may demonstrate different trust
behavioral pattern with time in future [27]. Gong et al. [16] examined the effects of
cognitive and emotional trust on mobile payment adoption. The limitation of this
study Gong et al. [16] is that sample size was relatively small and participants were
Chinese university students or faculties, which require further research in different
regional/national settings with a larger sample size. Hossain & Mahmud [28] studied
influence of cognitive style on mobile payment system adoption with an extended
technology acceptance model. The limitation of this study is that sample size is too
small and study used questionnaire which was completed by educated people with
prior use experience of mobile payment. Another limitation of this study Hossain &
Mahmud [28] is that it has not examined actual usage behavior.
Kapoor et al. [15] examined role of three sets of innovation attributes for
determining adoption of the interbank mobile payment service. The limitation of this
study is that the data collection was geographically restricted to only four largest
Indian cities. Given that the culture and geographical locations do impact the
diffusion of an innovations, Kapoor et al. [15] work should be tested using data from
smaller cities. Kim et al. [24] studied the adoption of mobile payment services for
“fintech” and the limitation of this study is that the samples of the survey were limited
to Seoul, the capital area, and certain age groups were predominantly represented,
giving way to regional and age biases. Liébana-Cabanillas et al. [25] examined
antecedents of the adoption of the new mobile payment systems with moderating
effect of age. Limitation of this study is that it was focused only on one mobile
payment system (SMS), while there are other technologies such as the NFC payment
systems that also need attention. Oliveira et al. [19] examined mobile payment to
understand the determinants of customer adoption and intention to recommend the
technology. Limitation of this study is that it hasn’t used some factors that some may
consider important to the adoption of mobile payment, such as trust [30], [31] and risk
[32]. Limitation of this research also concerns the age and location of the
questionnaire respondents; more than 88% were aged 45 years or less from Portugal.
5 Future Research Directions
Augsburg & Hedman [4] was conducted in Denmark, which has very high mobile
usage and very high maturity in credit and debit card usage; hence the high intention
to use mobile payment with or without VAS is not surprising. Further research can
focus in Western countries as well as in the context of emerging markets (such as
India) with high cash usage. Gao & Waechter [27] study suggest that future research
should compare pre-adoption and post-adoption of m-payment trust behavior to find
out whether trust behaviors changes over time. Gao & Waechter [27] also
recommended examining role of additional constructs such as perceived value,
perceived justice and perceived risk. Gong et al. [16] study primarily focuses on the
trust transfer mechanism from one source (web payment) to mobile payment (MP) as
one target. This study only examined the effects of emotional trust in web payment,
perceived similarity, and cognitive trust in MP on emotional trust in MP. As
emotional trust in really important in consumer decision-making, future studies could
empirically examine other valid mechanisms to build consumers’ emotional trust in
MP [16].
Hossain & Mahmud [28] recommended undertaking further research in the context
of rural areas in Bangladesh and testing an extended model by incorporating the
actual usage, cognitive style or any other relevant variables based on the recent
literature on this topic. Kapoor et al. [15] study can be extended by collecting more
representative data from other states and smaller towns. The future studies may want
to focus more on the influences of image as an innovation attribute. Also, the future
studies might want to test the various risk types associated to IMPS in order to arrive
at a more convincing explanation on the influences that riskiness may have on the
diffusion of IMPS in the Indian context [15].
Follow-up studies to Kim et al. [24] should analyze the impact on the acceptance
of groups classified into more specific age groups, income and device through a
multi-group model. Future research of Liébana-Cabanillas et al. [26] can be directed
towards in various technologies such as QR codes, a two dimensional bar code,
biometric fingerprints, voice payment, Google Goggles. Oliveira et al.’s [19] work
can be furthered by examining age and cultural differences. Studies with a larger
sample size from other geographical settings can help to confirm validity and
establish generalizability of Pham & Ho [12]. Longitudinal studies should be
conducted in future to test same research model at different points of time, which will
allow comparisons and will help to provide further insights towards consumers'
adoption behavior towards NFC mobile payments. In addition, the future research
should also validate the modified UTAUT model developed by some recent studies
(e.g. Dwivedi et al. [39, 40]; Rana et al. [41, 42]) in the areas of technology and e-
government adoption.
6 Conclusions
This study conducted a review of literature on consumer adoption of mobile
payments. The salient points emerged from this literature analysis suggest that TAM
and its extension as most utilized technology adoption theory/model for
understanding consumer adoption of mobile payments. Performance expectancy and
perceived usefulness emerged as most significant determinant of consumer’s
behavioral intention to use mobile payments whereas perceived risk was found as
inhibitor to the adoption of mobile payments in majority of studies.
Although this review presents a concise summary of mobile payment adoption
research, insight provide by it should be interpreted in light of the following
limitations. This review was based on literature search using only Scopus database, so
studies that are not indexed in this database may have been excluded. Future literature
reviews should consider other databases to address the limitations of this study. Also,
only a subset of studies identified was reviewed, remaining studies would be reviewed
in this ongoing work to explore if there are drivers and inhibitors that needs to be
considered by future studies. Also, this study only presented review about theories;
drivers and inhibitors, there are other aspects that require further detailed analysis.
This work mainly reviewed studies on mobile payment adoption; future reviews
should also include studies on other digital payment methods. The other limitation is
that this study focused on consumer adoption of mobile payment excluding
organization adoption and other stakeholders.
References
1. Barnes, S.: The mobile commerce value chain: analysis and future developments.
International Journal of Information Management. 22(2), 91--108 (2002)
2. Jack, W., Suri, T.: Mobile money: The economics of M-PESA (No. w16721). National
Bureau of Economic Research (2011)
3. Thakur, R., Srivastava, M.: Adoption readiness, personal innovativeness, perceived risk and
usage intention across customer groups for mobile payment services in India. Internet
Research. 24(3), 369--392 (2014)
4. Augsburg, C., Hedman, J.: Value added services and adoption of mobile payments.
Sixteenth International Conference on Electronic Commerce (2014)
5. De Kerviler, G., Demoulin, N., Zidda, P.: Adoption of in-store mobile payment: Are
perceived risk and convenience the only drivers?. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 31, 334--344 (2016)
6. Slade, E., Williams, M., Dwivedi, Y., Piercy, N.: Exploring consumer adoption of
proximity mobile payments. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 23, 209--223 (2014)
7. Mobile financial services development report: [Link]
WEF_MFSD_Report_2011.pdf, (2011).
8. Dwivedi, Y., Wastell, D., Laumer, S., Henriksen, H., Myers, M., Bunker, D., Elbanna, A.,
Ravishankar, M., Srivastava, S.: Research on information systems failures and successes:
Status update and future directions. Information Systems Frontiers, 17, 143--157 (2014)
9. Hughes, D., Dwivedi, Y., Rana, N., Simintiras, A.: Information systems project failure –
analysis of causal links using interpretive structural modelling. Production Planning &
Control, 27, 1313--1333 (2016)
10. Hughes, D., Dwivedi, Y., Simintiras, A., Rana, N.: Success and failure of IS/IT projects.
Springer, Cham, Switzerland (2016)
11. Zhanga, A., Yue, X., Kong, Y.: Exploring culture factors affecting the adoption of mobile
payment. Tenth International Conference on Mobile Business, 263--267 (2011)
12. Pham, T., Ho, J.: The effects of product-related, personal-related factors and attractiveness
of alternatives on consumer adoption of NFC-based mobile payments. Technology in
Society, 43, 159--172 (2015)
13. Keramati, A., Taeb, R., Larijani, A., Mojir, N.: A combinative model of behavioural and
technical factors affecting ‘Mobile’-payment services adoption: an empirical study. The
Service Industries Journal, 32, 1489--1504 (2012)
14. Mallat, N.: Exploring consumer adoption of mobile payments – A qualitative study. The
Journal of Strategic Information Systems. 16, 413--432 (2007)
15. Kapoor, K., Dwivedi, Y., Williams, M.: Examining the role of three sets of innovation
attributes for determining adoption of the interbank mobile payment service. Information
Systems Frontiers, 17, 1039--1056 (2014)
16. Gong, X., Zhang, K. Z., Zhao, S. J., Lee, M. K.: The Effects of Cognitive and Emotional
Trust on Mobile Payment Adoption: A Trust Transfer Perspective. In Proceedings of
Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS), Taiwan (2016)
17. Chandrasekhar, U., Nandagopal, R.: Mobile Payment Usage Intent in an Indian Context:
An Exploratory Study. Asian Journal of Information Technology, 15(3), 542--552 (2016)
18. Koenig-Lewis, N., Marquet, M., Palmer, A., Zhao, A.: Enjoyment and social influence:
predicting mobile payment adoption. The Service Industries Journal. 35, 537--554 (2015)
19. Oliveira, T., Thomas, M., Baptista, G., Campos, F.: Mobile payment: Understanding the
determinants of customer adoption and intention to recommend the technology. Computers
in Human Behavior. 61, 404--414 (2016)
20. Slade, E., Dwivedi, Y., Piercy, N., Williams, M.: Modeling Consumers’ Adoption
Intentions of Remote Mobile Payments in the United Kingdom: Extending UTAUT with
Innovativeness, Risk, and Trust. Psychology & Marketing. 32, 860--873 (2015)
21. Staykova, K., Damsgaard, J.: Adoption of Mobile Payment Platforms: Managing Reach and
Range. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research. 11, 66--85 (2016)
22. Andreev, P., Pliskin, N., Rafaeli, S.: Drivers and Inhibitors of Mobile-Payment Adoption
by Smartphone Users. International Journal of E-Business Research. 8, 50--67 (2012)
23. Berrado, A., Elfahli, S., El Garah, W.: Using data mining techniques to investigate the
factors influencing mobile payment adoption in morocco. Paper presented at the 2013 8th
International Conference on Intelligent Systems: Theories and Applications,
SITA, doi:10.1109/SITA.2013.6560791 (2013)
24. Kim, Y., Park, Y. J., Choi, J.: The Adoption of Mobile Payment Services for
“Fintech”. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 11(2), 1058--1061(2016)
25. Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Sánchez-Fernández, J., Muñoz-Leiva, F.: Antecedents of the
adoption of the new mobile payment systems: The moderating effect of age. Computers in
Human Behavior. 35, 464--478 (2014)
26. Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Sánchez-Fernández, J., Muñoz-Leiva, F.: The moderating effect of
experience in the adoption of mobile payment tools in Virtual Social Networks: The m-
Payment Acceptance Model in Virtual Social Networks (MPAM-VSN). International
Journal of Information Management. 34, 151--166, (2014)
27. Gao, L., Waechter, K.: Examining the role of initial trust in user adoption of mobile
payment services: an empirical investigation. Information Systems Frontiers. 19, 525--548,
(2015)
28. Hossain, R., Mahmud, I.: Influence of cognitive style on mobile payment system adoption:
An extended technology acceptance model. Paper presented at the 2016 International
Conference on Computer Communication and Informatics,
ICCCI, doi:10.1109/ICCCI.2016.7479973 (2016)
29. Lee, J. B., Lee, S. B., Park, C.: A Study on the Individual and Environmental Factors
Affecting Mobile Payment Service Acceptance-A Focus on NFC-based Payment
ServicesJae-Beom. International Information Institute (Tokyo). Information, 18(4), 1185
(2015)
30. Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Muñoz-Leiva, F., Sánchez-Fernández, J.: Influence of age in the
adoption of new mobile payment systems. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de
Negócios, 17(58), 1390 (2015)
31. Guillén, A., Herrera, L., Pomares, H., Rojas, I., Liébana-Cabanillas, F.: Decision Support
System to Determine Intention to Use Mobile Payment Systems on Social Networks: A
Methodological Analysis. International Journal of Intelligent Systems. 31, 153--172, (2015)
32. Slade, E., Williams, M., Dwivedi, Y.: Devising a research model to examine adoption of
mobile payments: An extension of UTAUT2. The Marketing Review. 14, 310--335 (2014)
33. Zhong, J., Dhir, A., Nieminen, M., Hämäläinen, M., Laine, J.: Exploring consumer
adoption of mobile payments in china. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 17th
International Academic MindTrek Conference: "Making Sense of Converging Media",
MindTrek, 318--325 (2013)
34. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., Davis, F. D.: User acceptance of information
technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425--478 (2003)
35. Dahlberg, T., Oorni, A.: Understanding changes in consumer payment habits-do mobile
payments and electronic invoices attract consumers? 40th Annual Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (2007)
36. Moore, G. C., Benbasat, I.: Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of
adopting an information technology innovation. Information systems research, 2(3), 192--
222 (1991)
37. Tornatzky, L. G., Klein, K. J.: Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-
implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on engineering
management, 1, 28--45 (1982)
38. Komiak, S. Y., Benbasat, I.: The effects of personalization and familiarity on trust and
adoption of recommendation agents. MIS quarterly 30(4), 941--960 (2006)
39. Dwivedi, Y.K., Rana, N.P., Jeyaraj, A., Clement, M., Williams, M.D. Re-examining the
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): Towards a Revised
Theoretical Model. Information Systems Frontiers, DOI: 10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y,
(2017a)
40. Dwivedi, Y.K., Rana, N.P., and Janssen, M., Lal, B., Williams, M.D., Clement, M.: An
Empirical Validation of a Unified Model of Electronic Government Adoption (UMEGA).
Government Information Quarterly, DOI: 10.1016/[Link].2017.03.001, (2017b)
41. Rana, N.P., Dwivedi, Y.K., Lal, B., Williams, M.D., Clement, M.: Citizens’ Adoption of an
Electronic Government System: Toward a Unified View. Information Systems Frontiers,
19(3), 549--568 (2017)
42. Rana, N.P., Dwivedi, Y.K., Williams, M.D., Weerakkody, V.: Adoption of Online Public
Grievance Redressal System in India: Toward Developing a Unified View. Computers in
Human Behavior, 59, 265--282 (2016)
