Article

Developing a Research Model for Mobile IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review
10(1) 82–98, 2021
Wallet Adoption and Usage © 2020 Indian Institute
of Management Kozhikode
Reprints and permissions:
in.sagepub.com/journals-permissions-india
DOI: 10.1177/2277975220965354
journals.sagepub.com/home/ksm
Ajimon George1 and Prajod Sunny2

Abstract
The scope of the mobile wallet in a ‘Cashless India’, whose utility has been spurred by the exponentially growing smart-
phone technology, is a contemporary topic of deliberation. The reach of mobile wallets gets broader each day with the
entry of new stakeholders into the scenario, making mobile wallets indispensible for meeting daily needs. Given the
COVID-19 pandemic situation, increased reliance on mobile wallets, and its acceptability among the public and other
associated e-services, researchers and service providers are eager to explore its adoption as well as its continued usage.
This paper theoretically examines factors influencing behavioural intention and actual usage of mobile wallets through
various technology adoption models and behavioural studies. Based on an extensive review of the literature, this paper
attempts to draw a comprehensive conceptualization of mobile wallet adoption and actual use by exploring the influence
of various key factors. This proposed model could successfully present the case of mobile wallet adoption and usage,
as well as offer the possibility of deriving important managerial implications concerning effective marketing techniques.

Keywords
Compatibility, perceived reputation, trust, promotional offers, perceived critical mass, behavioural intention, COVID-19

Introduction Digital financial services have brought financial

Going digital is a phenomenon no sector can afford to
ignore. Irrespective of the industry one is operating in—
whether large or small scale, traditional or e-commerce,
consumer interfacing or industrial—every sector is bound
to get affected by the digital wave that would sooner or
later transform the landscape of the economy. Mobile
phones have affected the lives of billions of people around
the globe and have transformed telephony tremendously.
The number of mobile phones in use surpasses every other
technical device that can be used to market, sell, produce,
or deliver products and services to consumers. This has
opened lucrative opportunities to both merchants and
service providers (Iman, 2018). The increasing number of
smartphone owners worldwide has paved the way for
traditional banking payment services, and non-financial
companies, like Google, to attract new customers and open
up new markets by extending their range of products and
services, particularly those concerning offering innovative
payment alternatives (Meyll & Walter, 2018).
services from bank branches into our homes and pockets.
During this transformation, financial transactions have
become more convenient and have reached a broader group
of users (Reiss, 2018). Technological innovations in mobile
devices and financial applications drive the adoption of
digital payments (Goparaju, 2017). Customers who use
their smartphones for mobile payments can store
information of credit or debit cards in mobile wallets on
their smartphones, and this information can be used to
perform payments by tapping or waving it over a sensor at
the point of sale or at the comfort of their homes.
The mobile wallet is a new application of mobile payment
that functions as a replacement for the conventional wallet
and more (Sumathy & KP, 2017). Mobile wallets add
more functions to smartphones by making it a virtual debit
card and enables a person’s money to move with his phone.
With mobile wallets, retailers gain another way to access
consumers and enhance sales by enabling customers to make
spontaneous purchases because they have quick and easy
access to money. Some of the most widely used mobile

1
Associate Professor & Research Guide Marian College Kuttikkanam (Autonomous), Kerala, India.
2
Assistant Professor, Kuriakose Elias College, Mannanam, Kerala, India.

Corresponding author:
Ajimon George, Associate Professor & Research Guide Marian College Kuttikkanam (Autonomous), 685531, Kerala, India.
E-mails: ajimon.george@mariancollege.org; prajodsunny@gmail.com
George and Sunny 83
wallets are Apple Pay, Samsung Pay, Google Pay, PayPal,
Amazon Pay, Paytm, PhonePe, PayZapp, etc. and they
provide a variety of services ranging from utility payment
services to ticket booking, recharges and so on. Advancements
in technology supporting mobile transactions made them
more convenient and transparent, which is helping to
develop trust among customers who are becoming habitual
of employing this mode of payment (Khan et al., 2017). ‘The
diffusion of technology-based payment solutions hinges on
addressing the needs, perceived or real, of consumers whose
adoption will determine whether any specific mobile
payment system becomes a standard’ (Amoroso & Magnier-
watanabe, 2012).
More than two-thirds of the mobile wallet users world-
wide reside in China and India. This is primarily due to
middle-class consumers avoiding cards in favour of easier-
to-use mobile options, with India having the fastest-growing
user base (Editors, 2018). ‘One of the key reasons for this
reverse trend is that M-wallets allow customers to bypass
the underdeveloped financial infrastructure’ (Kumar, Nim,
& Sharma, 2019). The global mobile payment market
reached a value of US$ 1,146 billion in 2019 and is expected
to witness strong growth during 2020–2025 according to
the leading market research group IMARC (‘Mobile
payment market’, n.d.). More than one billion people are
expected to make an in-store mobile payment in 2020
(Enberg, 2019). Mobile wallet transactions increased by 40
times in India in five years and it is growing 1.5 times faster
than the global average. In India, the digital economy is
around 8 percent of the GDP and is likely to increase by up
to 30 percent of the GDP by 2025 (Rai, 2019).
In a recent course of the events, Google is facing an
anti-trust case in India over its payment app, which alleges
that it prominently showcases its Google Pay app inside its
Android app store in India (‘Google faces antitrust case’,
2020). Many people still lack trust in mobile wallets
because of the perception that someone else is having
access to your bank account (Kothari, 2018). Also, the
small mobile wallet firms are facing the harsh reality that
they cannot compete with the bigger firms as the mobile
wallet business is still dominated by cashback offers
(Mitra, 2019). Technology giants like Amazon are pushing
e-wallet transactions by unveiling many offers that apply
to returned items too (‘Amazon offers’, 2017). Further,
despite the RBI launching an Ombudsman scheme for
digital transactions with effect from January 2019, it
directed large pre-paid instrument issuers to set up an
internal ombudsman to address the customer’s grievances
(‘Resolve our mobile wallets complaints’, 2019).
In light of the ever-growing numbers of mobile wallet
user, though the literature is abundant with many technology
adoption models, we must address the latest concerns of
trust such as data transfer and storage, and structural
support, and, at the same time, the positive effects of
promotional offers (PO). This paper applies the Extended
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
(UTAUT 2) to propose a research model incorporating
constructs from existing models, namely, the Diffusion of
Innovation theory and Trust-theoretic model (TM), and PO
as a new construct to meet the needs of a market dominated
by offers and cashbacks. Perceived benefits, the positive
outcomes associated with a behaviour (Tingchi Liu et al.,
2013), was considered in place of PO, but the huge amounts
spent in billions by top payment apps for offers such as
cashbacks to lure customers (Palepu & Sharma, 2019)
compelled us to examine the specific effect of such offers.
Furthermore, the attributes of service quality (SQ) such as
service reliability, promptness, and personalization act as
a strong determinant of trust (Zhou, 2013), and, as a
consequence, we extend the TM with SQ. Therefore the
proposed theoretical model intends to address the following
research questions:
1. Whether PO have a significant and direct effect on
behavioural intention (BI), in conjunction with other
constructs in the literature?
2. What is the cumulative effect of trust on the inten-
tion to use mobile wallets?
3. What is the role of SQ in building trust in mobile
wallets?
From the practitioner’s standpoint, this model can serve as
a guideline for the mobile wallet industry to make further
inroads into an ever-growing market.
Mobile Wallet and Related Terms
A mobile wallet is a much-advanced versatile application
that includes elements of mobile transactions, as well as
other items that one may find in a wallet, such as membership
cards, loyalty cards, and travel cards, while also storing
personal and sensitive information such as passports, credit
card information, PIN codes, online shopping accounts,
booking details, and insurance policies that can be encrypted
or password-protected (Shin, 2009). This information is
stored on the smartphone in an organized manner that
reduces redundancy in entering all these details while each
transaction takes place.
Mobile Wallet and Mobile Payments
Mobile payments are a broad umbrella term used for all
kinds of smartphone-enabled payment solutions such as
84 IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review 10(1)
mobile banking, mobile wallets, NFC-enabled payment
solutions, etc. All payment solutions on a mobile device
come under the purview of mobile payments. Thus mobile
wallets can store a variety of data, such as credit card
details, passport information, etc, thereby supplementing a
conventional wallet.
Mobile Wallet and Mobile Banking
Even though a mobile wallet is funded through one’s bank
account, it is different from a mobile banking application in
many ways. Mobile banking applications can be used to
make mobile payments, but they are essentially a gateway to
an existing bank account and thus most of the banks have
their separate mobile wallets, for instance, Payzapp by
HDFC bank. A mobile wallet, by contrast, is a substitute for
one’s physical wallet. Using a mobile wallet, one can link all
their existing credit and debit cards of any bank and can use
it to make payments and transfer money with a few clicks.
Literature Review and Model
Development
After reviewing the bulk of the renowned theories and
models in the area of technology adoption, the Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM) emerged as the most used
model. Diffusion of Innovation Theory (DOI), Theory of
Planned Behaviour (TPB), Unified Theory of Acceptance
and Use of Technology (UTAUT), TM and UTAUT 2 were
the other prominent models.
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of
Technology 2
TAM is a model that predicts intentions to adopt new tech-
nology by organizational users. However, it has an estab-
lished reputation and has been widely adopted to explain
innovative technology adoption by individual consumers
(Bailey, Pentina, Mishra, & Ben Mimoun, 2017). The
UTAUT is a consolidation of the constructs of various
adoption models and serves as a comprehensive model that
can be applied across a range of applications (Sharma &
Mishra, 2014). It was further extended by adding hedonic
motivation (HM), price value (PV), and habit (HB), and
individual difference variables such as age, gender, and
experience are theorized to moderate various relationships
in UTAUT 2, which was developed by Venkatesh, Thong,
& Xu (2012). The UTAUT 2 identified key additional
constructs and relationships, thereby tailoring it to a con-
sumer use context.
Diffusion of Innovation
Rogers offers a complex but unified theory of diffusion
that addresses many different aspects of a technology
acceptance process. Even though his theory was developed
years ago, they remain among those with the highest prac-
tical use (Hillmer, 2009). The various aspects of his theory
include relative advantage, compatibility (CO), complex-
ity, image, trialability, visibility, and results demonstrabil-
ity. Among these, only relative advantage and CO have
provided the most consistent explanation for consumer
action in adopting financial and mobile technologies (Lu,
Yang, Chau, & Cao, 2011). But relative advantage coin-
cides with perceived usefulness (PU) conceptually (Moore
& Benbasat, 1991).
Van Slyke, Ilie, Lou, and Stafford (2007) argue that the
concept of critical mass is complementary to traditional
diffusion theory. The two constructs of critical mass theory
stated by Markus (1994) are interactive media and univer-
sal access. Universal access is the belief that the intended
recipient is also using the same medium and that commu-
nication cannot be completed unless the other recipient
also uses that medium. Therefore it is imperative to exam-
ine the role of critical mass in determining mobile wallet
adoption.
Trust-theoretic Model for the Adoption of
M-payment Systems
A TM for adoption of mobile payment systems was
validated by Chandra, Srivastava, and Theng (2010) who
highlight the key role that consumer trust plays in the
adoption of mobile payment systems. They underlined the
importance of the two dimensions of consumer trust from
the context of mobile payment systems, that is, mobile
service provider characteristics and mobile technology
characteristics. The mobile service provider characteristics
affecting consumer trust were identified to be perceived
reputation and perceived opportunism, of which the latter
was found to be insignificant. Perceived environmental risk
and perceived structural assurance were the two factors of
mobile technology characteristics identified to be affecting
consumer trust. Furthermore, SQ was found to have the
largest effect on trust and thereby to facilitate the intention
to adopt mobile payments (Zhou, 2013). Consequently, the
TM is extended by incorporating the SQ construct.
George and Sunny 85
UTAUT 2 Constructs
Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use
Prior research included numerous frameworks and models
to elucidate the factors or determinants influencing the adop-
tion of technology. Most of them are predicated on TAM
(Davis, 1989), which has an established prominence and is
widely adopted to clarify new technological innovations. As
an attempt to operate psychological factors in information
systems and computer adoption, TAM was skilfully utilized
and extended to develop extensive models of adoption.
Here, PU and perceived ease of use (PEOU) were consid-
ered as crucial influencers on an individual’s perception
towards technology usage. PU is the degree to which a per-
son believes that using a particular system will enhance his
or her performance, while PEOU is the degree to which a
person believes that using a particular system will be free of
effort (Davis, 1989). Varied applications of TAM employed
a range of understanding of the impact of usefulness and
ease of use on the adoption of newer technological advance-
ments by the users. As a matter of fact, they were employed
to study user adoption patterns of information technology
(Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000; Taylor & Todd, 1995; Thong,
Hong, & Tam, 2006), internet banking (Hosein, 2009;
Montazemi & Qahri-saremi, 2015), mobile banking
(Hanafizadeh, Behboudi, Koshksaray, & Tabar, 2014; Singh
& Srivastava, 2018), online buying (Childers, Carr, Peck, &
Carson, 2001; Gefen, Karahanna, & Straub, 2003; Ingham,
Cadieux, & Berrada, 2015), mobile commerce (Agrebi &
Jallais, 2015; Aldás-Manzano, Ruiz-Mafé, & Sanz-Blas,
2009; Chong, 2013a; Hollingsworth & Dembla, 2013;
Kalinic & Marinkovic, 2016; Khalifa & Shen, 2008;
Natarajan, Balasubramanian, & Kasilingam, 2017; Wei
et al., 2009; Wong et al., 2012; Wu & Wang, 2005), biomet-
rics (Miltgen, Popovič, & Oliveira, 2013), wireless technol-
ogy (Fang, Chan, Brzezinski, & Xu, 2006), mobile ticketing
(Cheng & Huang, 2013; Herlina & Wibowo, 2011), near
field communication technology (Ooi & Tan, 2016; Pal,
Vanijja, & Papasratorn, 2015; Ramos-de-luna, Montoro-
Rıos, & Liebana-Cabanillas, 2016), and finally mobile wal-
lets (Amin, Azhar, Amin, & Akter, 2015; Kafsh, 2015; Patel,
2016; Sahut, 2008; Shaw, 2014; Swilley, 2016). Hence, PU
and PEOU can be used to establish a theoretical framework
for studying user behaviour intentions in adopting a mobile
wallet.
Social Influence
Social influence (SI) is the degree to which consumers
perceive that important others, such as family and friends,
believe they should use a specific technology (Venkatesh
et al., 2012). This variable is comparable to the subjective
norm from the theory of reasoned action (TRA) and the
TPB. Subjective norms reflect the perceived opinions of
another person or a group whose beliefs may be important
to the individual (Mathieson, 1991). SI is found to
propagate through the following mediums and hence is
categorized into (a) mass media influence—generally
comprising of newspapers, academic journals, magazines,
internet, radio, television—and (b) interpersonal influences
that pass through social networks such as peers, friends,
superiors, and so on (Wei et al., 2009).
Facilitating Conditions
Facilitating conditions (FC) are defined as the degree to
which an individual believes that an organizational and
technical infrastructure exists to support system usage
(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003). FC can make
adoption behaviour less difficult by removing any obstacles
to acceptance and can thereby ensure sustained usage (Rao
& Troshani, 2007). This is because the behaviour cannot
occur if the environment prevents it or if the FC make the
behaviour difficult. In the context of mobile services, FC
can be classified into external and internal resources, where
the former is embodied in the service network provided by
service operators and the latter corresponds to a mobile
device connected to the service network and accessed by
individuals (Cheong, Park, & Hwang, 2004). To take the
example of the mobile device as a facilitating factor, con-
sumers with different phones may experience different rates
of data transfer and consequently, have different levels of
intention to use mobile internet (Venkatesh et al., 2012). FC
such as mobile networks, speed of data connection, etc. can
affect the intention to adopt mobile wallets.
Hedonic Motivation
HM or the enjoyment construct is defined as the fun or
pleasure attained through the usage of any technology. It is
an index of reinforcement in its own right and is pursued
by various extends of technological operations, and it is
found to be crucial in dictating technology acceptance and
usage. The increased enjoyment found in the new interac-
tive media is predicted to generate a more positive attitude
towards such media platforms (Childers et al., 2001).
Scholarship in consumer usage and practices understands
HM as an important driver of technology use. Substantiating
this understanding, a study conducted on the continued use
of IT implied that positive affective reactions towards the
use of an IT can eventually help increase its continued
usage at the post-adoption stage (Thong et al., 2006).
86 IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review 10(1)
Price Value
PV is the trade-off between the perceived benefits of the
applications and the monetary cost of using them. The PV is
positive when the benefits of using a technology are per-
ceived to be greater than the monetary cost and such a PV
has a positive impact on intention (Venkatesh et al., 2012).
Cost is one of the factors that could slow down the develop-
ment of technology (Wei et al., 2009). Users of mobile bank-
ing were found to be encouraged by advantageous transaction
service fees or discouraged by economic considerations
such as concerns on basic fees for connecting mobile bank-
ing (Yang, 2009). Physical cash exchange is simple, fast, and
there is no additional cost involved. Because of this, most
mobile payment systems provide the service free to consum-
ers, and they continue to do so because switching back to
cash is very easy for all consumers (Heijden, 2002). The
overall expenses associated with the adoption of mobile wal-
lets are the initial purchase price of smartphones and the cost
of internet subscription, maintenance, and upgrade.
Habit
Given a stable supporting context, HBs are the tendencies
to repeat responses (Ouellette & Wood, 1998); they are
learned sequences of acts that become an automatic
response to specific situations, which may be functional in
obtaining certain goals or end states (Verplanken, Aarts, &
Knippenberg, 1997). HB has been operationalized in two
distinct ways: as a prior behaviour and as the extent to
which an individual believes the behaviour to be automatic
(Venkatesh et al., 2012).
Diffusion of Innovation Theory Constructs
Compatibility
CO is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as
being consistent with the existing values, past experiences,
and needs of potential adopters. An idea that is not compatible
with the prevalent values and norms of a social system will
not be adopted as rapidly as an innovation that is compatible
(Rogers, 1995). CO was one of the factors of an instrument
developed to measure the perceptions of adopting an
information technology innovation (Moore & Benbasat,
1991). Hence, if the mobile payment platform is more
compatible, it will reduce the need for a consumer’s lifestyle
to be changed. Thus the new mobile payment platform, such
as a mobile wallet, will be integrated into the customer’s
routine shopping process without any additional and difficult
steps, devices, or skills (Pathirana & Azam, 2017).
Perceived Critical Mass
Perceived critical mass (PCM) is defined as the degree to
which an individual believes that a particular technology or
system would be used by mass of people (Hsu & Lin,
2016). It is the effect that a service user has on the value of
that product to other people without receiving or paying
any compensation; it has to be noted that this could be
positive or negative (Seetharaman, Kumar, Palaniappan, &
Weber, 2017). As more people adopt the software and
hardware, participate in network activities, and adopt a
specific standard, the value of the network will be increased,
and the perception of critical mass will thus be reinforced
(Hsu & Lin, 2016).
Trust-theoretic Model Constructs
Perceived Reputation
Reputation, the prevailing view that people have about
someone or something, is the extent to which firms and
people in the industry believe a service provider is honest
and concerned about its customers (Doney & Cannon,
1997). It is a valuable asset that involves a long-term
investment of resources, effort, and attention to customer
relationships (Jarvenpaa, Tractinsky, & Vitale, 2000). Most
of the mobile wallet providers are either traditional bank-
ing service providers or other technology giants already
possessing a good reputation, which will result in consum-
ers trusting mobile wallets.
Perceived Security
PS is defined as the extent to which a user believes that
using a particular application will be risk-free (Fang et al.,
2006). Security indicates a consumer’s concern on his or
her personal information and payment security, which
includes fear of improper access, unauthorized secondary
use, errors, data collection, fraud, and financial loss (Gao,
Waechter, & Bai, 2015; Kim, Chung, & Lee, 2011; Tsai,
Egelman, Cranor, & Acquisti, 2011). Consumer’s security
and risk concerns are a major inhibitor for the adoption of
internet banking (George, 2017). PS can mitigate such
concerns and enhance consumers’ trust in mobile wallets.
Perceived Regulatory Support
The law-imposed regulations in commerce, when unstably
managed by governmental agencies, create regulatory
uncertainties that profoundly hinder the decision-making
George and Sunny 87
procedure of the management (Engau & Hoffmann, 2009).
‘Perceived regulatory support may be defined as the degree
to which consumers believe in the prevailing regulatory
framework’s capability to safeguard their interests, in the
cases of any disputes arising at any stage, while performing
a mobile wallet transaction’ (Madan & Yadav, 2016).
Interestingly, attempts to capture the effect of perceived
regulatory uncertainty on consumer’s perspective in
e-commerce adoption also found a similar significant
impact on the consumer’s decision-making procedure
(Alghamdi, Drew, & Alghaith, 2011; Alqahtani, Al-Badi,
& Mayhew, 2012; Madan & Yadav, 2018). Policies, regula-
tions, and the legal environment are all critical to technol-
ogy acceptance (Lu, Liu, Yu, & Wang, 2008). As is
understood, perceived regulatory uncertainty refers to a
consumer’s perceptions of the instability or uncertainties
of the regulatory environment (Yang, Liu, Li, & Yu, 2015).
Service Quality
The quality of service provided, no matter how small-scale
the service is, has been an index of a healthy provider–
customer environment. SQ is understood to be the result of
the consumer’s comparison of expected service with per-
ceived service. When perceived service is greater than the
expected service, the quality of service is more than satis-
factory and will tend toward ideal quality (Parasuraman,
Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985). Needless to say, the impact of
ideal quality on customer retention, market share, and prof-
itability is evidently quantifiable (Fojt, 1995). In the con-
text of mobile wallets, various SQ factors such as speedy
responses, app aesthetics, customization options, etc. can
result in customers trusting mobile wallets.
Trust
Trust has been defined as the belief that a party’s word or
promise is reliable and that a party will fulfil his/her obliga-
tions in an exchange relationship (Schurr & Ozanne, 1985).
A trust relationship involves two parties, the trustor and the
trustee, who are reliant on each other for mutual benefit
wherein the trustor has faith in the trustee’s honesty and
benevolence (Siau & Shen, 2003). The lack of trust arises
from the feeling of cyber consumers that they lack control
over the web merchants’ access to their personal informa-
tion during the online navigation process. Consumers who
decline to provide personal information to websites reported
that it is because they do not trust those who are collecting
the data (Hoffman, Novak, & Peralta, 1999).
E-commerce is one of the alternatives of several retail
shopping channels that customers will adopt only when they
have developed a particular level of trust in the company
and, especially, the shopping channel (Fung & Lee, 1999).
Trust was found to be a very important factor in the intention
to shop online (Chong, 2013a; Gao et al., 2015; Gefen &
Straub, 2017; Wei et al., 2009). In connection with mobile
wallets, trust is the extent to which consumers identify
mobile wallet application providers to be trustworthy
regarding the security, reputation, regulatory support, and
SQ pursued by them.
Promotional Offers
PO are commonly found to be used to enhance the effective-
ness of product sales efforts as well as to temporarily accen-
tuate consumer demand. Efforts such as offering lower
prices or other incentives are expected to cause significant
stimulation to product interest, trial, or purchase; hence, it is
implemented to attract new customers, retain present cus-
tomers, and counteract competitors. It may include various
kinds of benefits such as app download cash reward, coupon
codes, cash discounts, loyalty points, and other freebies that
are being offered by companies involved in providing
mobile wallet services (Madan & Yadav, 2018). Offering
incentives is not new in a marketing scenario. Most of the
mobile wallet companies provide users with cashbacks or
discounts that can be availed online as well as offline in
stores. Such PO are communicated to customers through
mass media and have been found to influence consumer
behaviour deeply (Madan & Yadav, 2016). This coupled
with the ever-increasing merchant tie-ups helps such compa-
nies to enlarge their customer base. Customers avail cou-
pons, discounts, and cashback offers, as these offers allow
them to spend lesser money during purchases made through
mobile wallets. With the ever-increasing competition and
the entry of new stakeholders into the mobile wallet sce-
nario, PO could become the main distinguishing factor of
mobile wallet adoption.
Behavioural Intention
The construct of BI has its roots from the widely discoursed
social psychology model called the TRA, which was
adapted and tailored to explain user acceptance of informa-
tion systems in the TAM (Davis, 1985). BI is the measure
of the strength of one’s intention to perform a specified
behaviour (Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989).
Moderating Variables
The UTAUT 2 focuses on three moderator variables, namely,
age, gender, and experience, and their effect on independent
88 IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review 10(1)
factors such as FC, HM, HB, and PV on BI. The demographic
composition of the market was identified as one of the key
factors that can impact the adoption and integration of
mobile wallets in emerging markets (Kumar et al., 2019).
The literature provides comprehensive evidence to
demonstrate the relationship between various demographic
characteristics and mobile wallet usage. So age, gender,
income, and experience are proposed to moderate the effect
of various independent variables identified in this paper.
Hypotheses
Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and
Behavioural Intention
The determining role played by PU and PEOU is an already
established idea in terms of its influence on BI: this can be
appropriately seen in the user’s adoption of various
technologies as well as in their attitude formation towards
that adopted technology (Akturan & Tezcan, 2012; Aldás-
Manzano et al., 2009; Fang et al., 2006; Gefen et al., 2003;
Hanafizadeh et al., 2014; Hosein, 2009; Pietro et al., 2015;
Wu & Wang, 2005). Noteworthy enough, several empirical
data revealed a similar influence pattern of PU and PEOU
in the case of mobile wallets as well (Amin et al., 2015;
Kafsh, 2015). So, PU and PEOU can be proposed as one of
the major factors that determine the intention to adopt
mobile wallets.
PU of mobile wallets positively impact the user’s BI to
adopt mobile wallets
PEOU of mobile wallets positively impact the user’s BI
to adopt mobile wallets
Social Influence and Behavioural Intention
Research models and study findings that incorporated SI as
its component has revealed striking findings, and a few
such relevant study findings are quoted further. SI was
observed to be impactful on wireless mobile data adoption
(Lu et al., 2008), internet banking (Martins, Oliveira, &
Popovič, 2014), mobile apps usage (Hew, Lee, Ooi, & Wei,
2015), e-health services (Venugopal, Jinka, & Priya, 2016),
e-government services (Alharbi, Papadaki, & Dowland,
2017), e-learning systems (El-Masri & Tarhini, 2017), and
mobile commerce adoption (Chong, 2013b; Gefen &
Straub, 2017). SI was tested in the context of mobile
payments also and it acquired more support in respect to its
impact on BI (Abrahão, Moriguchi, & Andrade, 2016;
Liébana-Cabanillas, Sánchez-Fernández, & Muñoz-Leiva,
2014a, 2014b; Megadewandanu, Suyoto, & Pranowo,
2016; Oliveira, Thomas, Baptista, & Campos, 2016; Slade,
Williams, Dwivedi, & Piercy, 2015). Moreover, it was
found to be culturally relevant and appropriate as per a
study conducted in India (Sivathanu, 2019). When the
opinions of peers, friends, and superiors are positive, it
may encourage others to adopt mobile wallets. Thus the
following hypothesis is formulated:
SI positively influences customers’ BI to use mobile
wallets
Hedonic Motivation and Behavioural Intention
HM is found to be a critical determinant of BI and was
found to be a more important driver than PU is in non-
organizational contexts (Venkatesh et al., 2012). Hedonic
aspects of mobile shopping and mobile banking were
found to act as predictors of critical nature of the consumers’
BI (Alalwan, Dwivedi, & Rana, 2017; Baptista & Oliveira,
2015; Chopdar, Korfiatis, Sivakumar, & Lytras, 2018;
Madan & Yadav, 2018). Various studies on proximity
mobile payments such as NFC (Near Field Communication)
also proves HM to be a strong influence on BI to use
(Khalilzadeh, Ozturk, & Bilgihan, 2017; Slade et al.,
2015). It was also found to influence the adoption of web-
based learning systems in a study conducted in Qatar and
the United States (El-Masri & Tarhini, 2017). In the context
of mobile application usage, if its usage is enjoyable to an
individual, he or she would have a higher intention to use
mobile apps (Hew et al., 2015). In certain mobile payment
studies, it was tested and empirically proved that it has a
significant effect on BI (Megadewandanu et al., 2016;
Sivathanu, 2019). Therefore, it is postulated that:
HM positively influences BI to use a mobile wallet
Price Value and Behavioural Intention
Cost was found to have a significant negative effect on the
BI to use mobile commerce (Chong, 2013a; Madan &Yadav,
2018; Wei et al., 2009; Wu & Wang, 2005), mobile banking
(Hanafizadeh et al., 2014; Singh & Srivastava, 2018), and
mobile internet (Kim, Chan, & Gupta, 2007). However, cost
was found to be insignificant when it comes to mobile pay-
ment (Abrahão et al., 2016; Oliveira et al., 2016; Yang, Lu,
Gupta, Cao, & Zhang, 2012). Given the varied opinions, it
was decided to test the relationship between PV and BI.
PV positively influences BI to use a mobile wallet
George and Sunny 89
Compatibility and Behavioural Intention
Various studies confirm that CO positively and directly
impacts BI to use a technology (Wu & Wang, 2005).
Consistent with these studies, perceived CO was found to
have the strongest effect on BI among determinants of
m-booking acceptance (Wang & Liao, 2008). It was identi-
fied to have the strongest positive influence on consumers’
intention to adopt m-banking (Hanafizadeh et al., 2014;
Koenig-Lewis, Palmer, & Moll, 2010). Within the scope of
mobile payments, the findings highlight the importance of
CO in determining BI to adopt (Balachandran & Tan, 2015;
Lu et al., 2011; Schierz, Schilke, & Wirtz, 2010; Yang
et al., 2012).
There is a positive relationship between CO and BI to
adopt mobile wallets.
Perceived Critical Mass and Behavioural Intention
PCM was found to have a direct impact on the intention to
use groupware technology (Lou, Luo, & Strong, 2000). It
plays an important role in people joining social networking
sites (Lin & Lu, 2011), as well as in determining the BI to
adopt mobile shopping (Madan & Yadav, 2018). Network
externalities or critical mass play a critical role in setting
up a new payment solution (Katz & Shapiro, 1986). In fact,
one of the reasons for the weak penetration of e-wallets in
the European market was the lack of network externalities
(Sahut, 2008). The payment platform needs to be supported
by enough merchants to enable a critical mass of users so
that the payment system is viable (Zmijewska & Lawrence,
2005). Hence, critical mass was found to be a very reliable
indicator of BI to adopt mobile wallets (Seetharaman et al.,
2017). Once a large number of people start using mobile
wallets, its utility increases resulting in more convenience
to its users. Given the evidence that PCM will affect the
adoption of mobile wallets, the following hypothesis is
formulated:
PCM of users has a positive effect on users’ BI to use
mobile wallets
Promotional Offers and Behavioural Intention
PO were found to affect the adoption rate of internet bank-
ing users (Hosein, 2009). A notable study implied that PO
in the form of discount coupon codes, loyalty points, and
cash rewards could positively influence the consumers’ BI
toward mobile shopping (Madan & Yadav, 2018).
Moreover, cashback offers were found to be a contributing
factor to the increased use of digital transactions in India
(Baghla, 2018). Further, a positive relationship was estab-
lished between PO provided by mobile wallet companies
and consumers’ BI to adopt mobile wallet services (Bagla
& Sancheti, 2018; Madan & Yadav, 2016). Hence, there
arises the need to understand the role of PO on the con-
sumer’s BI to use a mobile wallet.
Therefore, the following hypothesis is constructed:
PO have a positive effect on the customer’s BI to use a
mobile wallet
Facilitating Conditions, Behavioural Intention,
and Usage
Previous research has shown that FC positively influences
BI to use mobile wallets (Cheong et al., 2004; Madan &
Yadav, 2016; Sivathanu, 2019). It were found out to be one
of the strongest factors in explaining BI among users aged
between 20 years and 34 years old (Tang et al., 2014).
Moreover, it was also found to have a positive and signifi-
cant impact on the usage of mobile wallets (Sobti, 2019).
The following hypotheses were formulated based on the
aforementioned study findings:
FC positively influence BI to adopt mobile wallets
FC positively influence usage of mobile wallets
Habit, Behavioural Intention, and Usage
The impact of HB on technological usage is an area of
active research, yielding substantial understanding of the
influence pattern of HB on consumer behaviour. HB was
found to a have a significant effect on the intention to use
as well as the intention to continue the usage of information
systems (Limayem, Hirt, & Cheung, 2007). This tendency
was found to be maintained even in a diversified
environment where associated variations depending on
age, gender, and experience could be observed (Venkatesh
et al., 2012). Interestingly, a study based in Qatar and the
United States observed the influence of HB in the adoption
of e-learning systems. Further, studies had found its
positive influence on the adoption of internet banking as
well as mobile banking (Alalwan, Dwivedi, & Williams,
2015; Baptista & Oliveira, 2015; Jorge, Begoña, & Maria,
2015) and it was confirmed as the most significant driver in
mobile apps usage intention (Chopdar et al., 2018; Hew
et al., 2015). In the context of digital payments and
proximity mobile payments too, the construct of HB was
found to have a prominent positive influence on BI to use
these systems (Sivathanu, 2019; Slade et al., 2015). This
idea was adequately substantiated by a study conducted in
Indonesia where HB was found to be the most significant
90 IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review 10(1)
factor affecting BI to use mobile wallets (Megadewandanu
et al., 2016). As mobile wallets are now integrated with
many other services such as booking tickets, recharging,
and making bill payments, we hypothesize that this will
bring about HB formation resulting in higher BI. HB was
also found to significantly affect the usage behaviour of
various technologies such as internet banking and mobile
banking (Alalwan et al., 2015; Baptista & Oliveira, 2015;
Jorge et al., 2015). Thus the following hypotheses are
formulated:
HB positively influences BI to use mobile wallets
HB positively influences the usage of mobile wallets
Perceived Reputation, Perceived Security, Perceived
Regulatory Support, Service Quality and Trust
Perceived reputation was found to be a determinant of trust
in many studies (Ganesan, 1994; Wilson, 1990). It appears
to be a significant determinant of consumer trust in an
Internet-based store (Jarvenpaa et al., 2000) and was found
to have a substantial effect on trust while conducting
e-commerce transactions (Chellappa & Pavlou, 2002).
When it comes to mobile payment adoption, the perceived
reputation of the mobile service provider was found to be
an important trust-building factor (Chandra et al., 2010;
Daştan & Gürler, 2016). So the customer perception of the
mobile wallet provider’s reputation may form the basis of
their trustworthiness.
Perceived reputation has a positive influence on trust in
mobile wallets.
The perception of a high level of security was found to
affect student’s trust in mobile cloud storage positively
(Arpaci, 2016). It was also found to positively affect trust
in e-government services (Alharbi et al., 2017), e-commerce
(Chellappa & Pavlou, 2002; Gao et al., 2015), and wireless
technology (Fang et al., 2006). Increased levels of PS were
found to result in a greater intent to purchase products on
the Web (Salisbury, Pearson, Pearson, & Miller, 2003), use
mobile banking (Singh & Srivastava, 2018), and use
mobile shopping (Chopdar et al., 2018). When people
perceive highly of mobile payment security, they are more
likely to trust in mobile payment (Fan, Shao, Li, & Huang,
2018), which enhances people’s trust in the mobile wallet
(Kumar, Adlakaha, & Mukherjee, 2018). This asserts the
importance of PS as an antecedent of trust.
PS has a positive influence on trust in mobile wallets
As the mobile wallet is a relatively new product, a clear and
transparent regulatory environment throughout interaction is
vital to safeguard the interests of all the parties involved.
Uncertainties in the regulatory atmosphere may influence
consumers’ risk concerns in mobile wallets. In line with this
thought, Chandra et al. (2010) found that a sound regulatory
framework capable of safeguarding the interests of consum-
ers while performing a mobile payment transaction helps in
developing trust in mobile payments. Therefore,
PRS has a positive influence on trust in mobile wallets
When it comes to online selling, until the prospects of SQ
gained attention, low price and web presence were initially
thought to be the drivers of success; The responsiveness,
reliability and assurance aspect of online SQ were very
important factors in increasing consumer trust (Gefen,
2002). E-shopping quality, in particular the quality of the
website, its features, and interface performance, were
found to significantly affect trust (Ha & Stoel, 2009). The
latest research evidence continues to reveal the effect of
SQ on user trust in mobile telecommunication services
(Liu, Guo, & Lee, 2011), mobile shopping (Gao et al.,
2015), and mobile payment services (Zhou, 2013). Besides,
SQ was found to have a positive effect on the adoption of
internet banking (Kumar, Bijoy, & George, 2012).
SQ has a positive influence on trust in mobile wallets
Trust and Behavioural Intention
Trust was found to play an important role in developing a
positive BI towards technology (Wu et al., 2011). It was
also found to be one of the most significant antecedents of
BI to adopt mobile banking (Alalwan et al., 2017;
Hanafizadeh et al., 2014; Montazemi & Qahri-saremi,
2015; Oliveira, Faria, Thomas, & Popovič, 2014), wireless
mobile data services (Alalwan et al., 2018; Lu et al., 2008),
mobile ticketing (Herlina & Wibowo, 2011), biometrics
(Miltgen et al., 2013), mobile cloud storage services
(Arpaci, 2016), co-creative service innovation activities
(Sarmah, Rahman, & Kamboj, 2017), e-learning systems
(El-Masri & Tarhini, 2017), and e-government services
(Alharbi et al., 2017). The extent of research has proven
that trust is an important determinant of intention to use
mobile payments (Chandra et al., 2010; Kumar et al., 2018;
Madan & Yadav, 2016; Ooi & Tan, 2016; Shaw, 2014;
Shin, 2009; Slade et al., 2015; Xin, 2013; Zhou, 2013).
Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed to
investigate the link between trust and BI:
The higher the degree of trust, the higher is the BI to
adopt mobile wallets
George and Sunny 91
Behavioural Intention and Actual Usage
There exist a strong correlation between BI and actual
behaviour (Ajzen, 2002). BI was found to be a significant
determinant of actual usage in diverse contexts such as
online shopping (Lin, 2007), electronic health records
(Venugopal et al., 2016), and internet banking (Martins et
al., 2014). Specifically, it is observed that behaviour intention
to shop over mobile devices determines the consumer’s
mobile shopping behaviour (Chopdar et al., 2018; Madan &
Yadav, 2018; Wu & Wang, 2005). It was empirically tested
and found to be true in the case of digital payments as well
(Sivathanu, 2019). Therefore, it is proposed that:
BI to use mobile wallets positively influence usage of
mobile wallets
Moderator Effects
Considerable research has proved the crucial role played by
age, gender, income, and experience in determining the
Figure 1.  Model for Mobile Wallet Adoption and Usage
Source: Conceptualized model by the authors
strength of various relationships. Age and gender were found
to moderate many technology adoption relationships. Recent
studies proved that they also affect mobile wallet adoption
(Singh, Srivastava, & Sinha, 2017; Sobti, 2019; Vasantha &
Sarika, 2019). Income was found to play an important role in
influencing various relationships in the case of mobile games
(Ha, Yoon, & Choi, 2007) and mobile wallets (Shin, 2009).
Experience was also found to increase the intention to use
mobile payment systems (Liébana-Cabanillas et al., 2014b).
Consequently, age, gender, income, and experience are taken
as moderator variables in this paper.
Conceptual Model
The research model hoped to explore the relative influence
of various factors on the BI and use behaviour of mobile
wallets. The research model developed has several factors
that were adapted from the extant literature. As depicted in
Figure 1, the UTAUT 2 model is extended by incorporating
constructs from the Diffusion of Innovation theory and
TM, and two substantial constructs, namely, SQ, and PO.
92 IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review 10(1)
Contributions
Given the huge practical relevance, the key purpose of this
paper was to develop an integrative model of factors affect-
ing intention to use and actual use towards mobile wallets.
Due to this objective, our paper focused on BI to adopt
mobile wallets as a primary indicator of consumer accept-
ance. The existent research has focused on consumers’ ini-
tial adoption of mobile wallets and has barely considered
their actual usage, which is critical to a mobile wallet pro-
vider’s success. In this regard, this framework contributes
to the existing literature by providing new insights into the
actual usage of mobile wallets. Our model embedded vari-
ous factors that can be integrated to better understand those
factors that influence intention to use and actual use.
Research focusing on the relative impact of these factors
on consumers’ intention to adopt and use mobile wallets
will have valuable managerial implications. Relevant con-
structs of existing models were considered, taking into
account the ever-changing mobile technologies and ser-
vices, which were then incorporated into an extended
model of mobile wallet services, taking into account sev-
eral perspectives. To conclude, we are certain that this
research model will provide a framework to understand the
mobile wallet ecosystem comprehensively.
Theoretical and Practical Implications
The proposed model attempts to view beyond the
acceptance of mobile wallet services to actual usage.
Moreover, the model can be tested empirically to provide
the groundwork to guide further research in the field of
mobile wallet adoption. Such a framework offers the
possibility of deriving important managerial implications
regarding how mobile wallet services could be marketed
more effectively, resulting in greater consumer acceptance
and usage. This is of utmost importance because the
number of firms already offering, or interested in, adopting
mobile wallet services has continually increased, and
direction is needed on how managers can successfully
increase the number of customers who choose this form of
payment as a substitute to more traditional payment
services. The various factors identified in this paper can
serve as a guideline for increasing further market
penetration of mobile wallet services. Such a framework
can be useful for determining the adoption potential of new
services as well. The practitioners, that is, service providers,
can apply this model to understand the moderating
conditions such as age, gender, income, and experience,
and can thereby cater their services to each group based on
their characteristics to increase mobile wallet usage and
penetration. It will also help them to provide personalized
offers to customers based on demographic outcomes drawn
from the paper. Based on this framework, mobile wallet
providers can push their services to more retailers by
highlighting the advantages of using a mobile wallet. From
an academic perspective, even though the framework is
based on established TAMs, it is extended by including
pertinent constructs such as trust and PO. Even though
UTAUT 2 measures the influence of age, gender, and
experience as moderators of various variables, we extended
it by including mobile wallet usage experience as a
moderator variable.
Directions for Future Research
Future researches can concentrate on other players in the
mobile wallet environment, such as merchants or retailers,
to know their perspective on mobile wallets. This would
help service providers to understand the retailers’ perspec-
tive and would encourage them to integrate mobile wallets
into their business. Moreover, with everyone across the
world being confined to their homes in this extraordinary
situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, future studies can
explore whether there is a spurt in mobile wallet usage dur-
ing the pandemic period. Governments all over the world
are prescribing social distancing as a social vaccine to pre-
vent human-to-human transmission of COVID-19.
Numerous businesses including retailers, online sellers,
online food delivery, online cab services, etc. are promot-
ing contactless payments to this effect. On the aforemen-
tioned backdrop, we recommend studying these
circumstances in future researches and also conducting an
empirical study based on the proposed model in this paper.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
ORCID iD
Ajimon George https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9680-9482
References
Abrahão, R. de S., Moriguchi, S. N., & Andrade, D. F. (2016).
Intention of adoption of mobile payment: An analysis in
the light of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use
of Technology (UTAUT). RAI Revista de Administração
e Inovação, 13(3), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rai.2016.06.003
George and Sunny 93
Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re
having fun: Cognitive absorption and beleifs about infor-
mation technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665–694.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3250951
Agrebi, S., & Jallais, J. (2015). Explain the intention to use
smartphones for mobile shopping. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services, 22(2015), 16–23. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.09.003
Ajzen, I. (2002). Residual effects of past on later behavior :
Habituation and reasoned action perspectives. Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 6(2), 107–122.
Akturan, U., & Tezcan, N. (2012). Mobile banking adoption of
the youth market: Perceptions and intentions. Marketing
Intelligence and Planning, 30(4), 444–459. https://doi.org/
10.1108/02634501211231928
Alalwan, A. A., Baabdullah, A., Rana, N. P., Tamilmani, K.,
& Dwivedi, Y. K. (2018). Examining Adoption of Mobile
Internet in Saudi Arabia: Extending TAM with Perceived
Enjoyment, Innovativeness and Trust. Technology in Society,
(May), 34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.06.007
Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Rana, N. P. (2017). Factors
influencing adoption of mobile banking by Jordanian bank
customers: Extending UTAUT2 with trust. International
Journal of Information Management, 37(3), 99–110. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.01.002
Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2015).
Consumer adoption of internet banking in Jordan: Examining
the role of hedonic motivation, habit, self-efficacy and trust.
Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 20(2), 145–157.
Retrieved from http://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa39600
Aldás-Manzano, J., Ruiz-Mafé, C., & Sanz-Blas, S. (2009).
Exploring individual personality factors as drivers of M-shopping
acceptance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 109(6),
739–757. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570910968018
Alghamdi, R., Drew, S., & Alghaith, W. (2011). Factors
influencing e-commerce adoption by retailers in Saudi Arabia:
A qualitative analysis. Electronic Journal of Information
Systems in Developing Countries, 47(7), 1–23. https://doi.
org/10.1002/j.1681-4835.2011.tb00335.x
Alharbi, N., Papadaki, M., & Dowland, P. (2017). The impact
of security and its antecedents in behaviour intention of
using e-government services. Behaviour & Information
Technology, 36(6), 620–636. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449
29X.2016.1269198
Alqahtani, M. A., Al-Badi, A. H., & Mayhew, P. J. (2012).
The enablers and disablers of e-commerce: Consumers’
perspectives. Electronic Journal of Information Systems
in Developing Countries, 54(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/
10.1002/j.1681-4835.2012.tb00380.x
Amazon looks to push e-wallet transactions, unveils multiple
offers. (2017). Retrieved June 20, 2020, from https://www.
moneycontrol.com/news/business/amazon-looks-to-push-e-
wallet-transactions-unveils-multiple-offers-2337103.html
Amin, K., Azhar, A., Amin, A., & Akter, A. (2015). Applying the
Technology Acceptance Model in examining Bangladeshi
consumers’ behavioral intention to use mobile wallet:
PLS-SEM approach. In 18th International Conference on
Computer and Information Technology (pp. 93–98).
Amoroso, D. L., & Magnier-watanabe, R. (2012). Building a
research model for mobile wallet consumer adoption: The
case of Mobile Suica in Japan. Journal of Theoretical and
Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 7(1), 94–110.
https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-18762012000100008
Arpaci, I. (2016). Understanding and predicting students’ intention
to use mobile cloud storage services. Computers in Human
Behavior, 58(2016), 150–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.
2015.12.067
Baghla, A. (2018). A study on the future of digital payments
in India. International Journal of Research and Analytical
Reviews, 5(4), 85–89.
Bagla, R. K., & Sancheti, V. (2018). Gaps in customer satisfaction
with digital wallets: Challenge for sustainability. Journal of
Management Development, 37(6), 442–451. https://doi.org/
10.1108/JMD-04-2017-0144
Bailey, A. A., Pentina, I., Mishra, A. S., & Ben Mimoun, M.
S. (2017). Mobile payments adoption by US consumers:
An extended TAM. International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management, 45(6), 626–640. https://doi.
org/10.1108/IJRDM-08-2016-0144
Balachandran, D., & Tan, G. W. (2015). Regression modelling
of predicting NFC mobile payment adoption in Malaysia.
International Journal of Modelling in Operations
Management, 5(2), 100–116. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMOM.
2015.072671
Baptista, G., & Oliveira, T. (2015). Understanding mobile
banking: The unified theory of acceptance and use of
technology combined with cultural moderators. Computers
in Human Behavior, 50(2015), 418–430. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.024
Chandra, S., Srivastava, S. C., & Theng, Y.-L. (2010). Evaluating
the role of trust in consumer adoption of mobile payment
systems: An empirical analysis. Communications of the
Association for Information Systems, 27(1), 561–588.
Chellappa, R. K., & Pavlou, P. A. (2002). Perceived infor-
mation security, financial liability and consumer trust in
electronic commerce transactions. Logistics Information
Management, 15(5/6), 358–368. https://doi.org/10.1108/
09576050210447046
Cheng, Y., & Huang, T. (2013). High speed rail passengers’ mobile
ticketing adoption. Transportation Research Part C, 30(May
2013), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2013.02.001
Cheong, J. H., Park, M.-C., & Hwang, J. H. (2004). Mobile
payment adoption in Korea: Switching from credit card.
Childers, T. L., Carr, C. L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic
and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behavior.
Journal of Retailing, 77(4), 511–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0022-4359(01)00056-2
Chong, A. Y.-L. (2013a). A two-staged SEM-neural network
approach for understanding and predicting the determinants
of m-commerce adoption. Expert Systems with Applications,
40(4), 1240–1247.
Chong, A. Y.-L. (2013b). Predicting m-commerce adoption
determinants: A neural network approach. Expert Systems
with Applications, 40(2), 523–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
eswa.2012.07.068
Chopdar, P. K., Korfiatis, N., Sivakumar, V. J., & Lytras, M.
D. (2018). Mobile shopping apps adoption and perceived
risks: A cross-country perspective utilizing the unified
theory of acceptance and use of technology. Computers in
Human Behavior, 86, 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2018.04.017
Daştan, İ., & Gürler, C. (2016). Factors affecting the adoption
of mobile payment systems: An empirical analysis. Emerging
94 IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review 10(1)
Markets Journal, 6(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.5195/emaj.
2016.92
Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for
empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory
and results.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of
use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS
Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User
acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two
theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.
Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997). An examination of the
nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of
Marketing, 61, 35–51.
Editors, Em. (2018). China and India Lead in Proximity Mobile
Payment Usage for 2019. Retrieved June 16, 2020, from
https://www.emarketer.com/content/china-and-india-lead-
mobile-payment-adoption-for-2019
El-Masri, M., & Tarhini, A. (2017). Factors affecting the adoption
of e-learning systems in Qatar and USA: Extending the unified
theory of acceptance and use of technology 2 (UTAUT2).
Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3),
743–763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9508-8
Enberg, J. (2019). Global Mobile Payment Users 2019. Retrieved
June 16, 2020, from https://www.emarketer.com/content/
global-mobile-payment-users-2019
Engau, C., & Hoffmann, V. H. (2009). Effects of regulatory
uncertainty on corporate strategy - an analysis of firms’
responses to uncertainty about post-Kyoto policy.
Environmental Science & Policy, 12(7), 766–777. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.08.003
Fan, J., Shao, M., Li, Y., & Huang, X. (2018). Understanding
users’ attitude toward mobile payment use: A comparative
study between China and the USA. Industrial Management
& Data Systems, 118(3), 524–540. https://doi.org/10.1108/
IMDS-06-2017-0268
Fang, X., Chan, S., Brzezinski, J., & Xu, S. (2006). Moderating
effects of task type on wireless technology acceptance. Journal
of Management Information Systems, 22(3), 123–157.
Fojt, M. (1995). Strategies for service quality. Journal of Services
Marketing, 9(3), 1–72.
Fung, R. K. K., & Lee, M. K. O. (1999). EC-Trust (trust in
electronic commerce): Exploring the antecedent factors. In
AMCIS 1999 Proceedings (pp. 517–519).
Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long-term orientation in
buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 58, 1–19.
Gao, L., Waechter, K. A., & Bai, X. (2015). Understanding
consumers’ continuance intention towards mobile purchase:
A theoretical framework and empirical study - A case of
China. Computers in Human Behavior, 53(December 2015),
249–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.014
Gefen, D. (2002). Customer loyalty in e-commerce. Journal of
the Association for Information Systems, 3, 27–51.
Gefen, D., & Straub, D. W. (2017). Consumer trust in B2C
e-Commerce and the importance of social presence:
Experiments in e-products and e-services. Omega, 32(6),
407–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.01.006
Gefen, Karahanna, & Straub. (2003). Trust and TAM in online
shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90.
https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519
George, A. (2017). Precautions for safe use of internet banking:
Scale development and validation. IIM Kozhikode Society
& Management Review, 6(2), 186–195. https://doi.org/
10.1177/2277975217704049
Google faces antitrust case in India over payments app. (2020).
Retrieved June 20, 2020, from https://economictimes.
indiatimes.com/tech/ites/google-faces-antitrust-case-in-
india-over-payments-app-sources/articleshow/76035705.cms
Goparaju, H. (2017). Digital payment sector: The sunrise industry
in India: A review. The IUP Journal of Business Strategy,
14(2), 7–19.
Ha, I., Yoon, Y., & Choi, M. (2007). Determinants of adoption
of mobile games under mobile broadband wireless access
environment. Information and Management, 44(3), 276–286.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2007.01.001
Ha, S., & Stoel, L. (2009). Consumer e-shopping acceptance:
Antecedents in a technology acceptance model. Journal of
Business Research, 62(5), 565–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jbusres.2008.06.016
Hanafizadeh, P., Behboudi, M., Koshksaray, A. A., & Tabar,
M. J. S. (2014). Mobile-banking adoption by Iranian bank
clients. Telematics and Informatics, 31(1), 62–78. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tele.2012.11.001
Heijden, H. Van Der. (2002). Factors affecting the successful
introduction of mobile payment systems. In BLED 2002
Proceedings (pp. 430–443).
Herlina, D. S., & Wibowo, P. A. (2011). Technology Acceptance
Model of mobile ticketing. In Proceedings of The1st
International Conference on Information Systems For
Business Competitiveness (ICISBC) (pp. 117–122).
Hew, J.-J., Lee, V.-H., Ooi, K.-B., & Wei, J. (2015). What
catalyses mobile apps usage intention: An empirical analysis.
Industrial Management and Data Systems, 115(7), 1269–
1291. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-01-2015-0028
Hillmer, U. (2009). Existing theories considering technology
adoption. Technology Acceptance in Mechatronics. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-8375-6_3
Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P., & Peralta, M. (1999). Building
consumer trust online. Communications of the ACM, 42(4),
80–85. https://doi.org/10.1145/299157.299175
Hollingsworth, C. L., & Dembla, P. (2013). Towards an
understanding why users engage in m-commerce. In SAIS
2013 Proceedings (pp. 59–64).
Hosein, N. Z. (2009). Internet banking: An empirical study of
adoption rates among midwest community banks. Journal of
Business & Economics Research, 7(11), 51–72.
Hsu, C., & Lin, J. C. (2016). An empirical examination of consumer
adoption of internet of things services: Network externalities
and concern for information privacy perspectives. Computers
in Human Behavior, 62(September), 516–527. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.023
Iman, N. (2018). Is mobile payment still relevant in the fintech
era? Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,
30(July-August 2018), 72–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.
2018.05.009
Ingham, J., Cadieux, J., & Berrada, A. M. (2015). E-shopping
acceptance: A qualitative and meta-analytic review.
Information and Management, 52(1), 44–60. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.im.2014.10.002
Jarvenpaa, S. L., Tractinsky, N., & Vitale, M. (2000). Consumer
trust in an internet store. Information Technology and
Management, 1(1–2), 45–71. https://doi.org/10.1023/A
Jorge, A.-G., Begoña, P.-P., & Maria, A. R.-J. (2015). Elderly
and internet banking: An application of UTAUT2. Journal
George and Sunny 95
of Internet Banking and Commerce, 20(1), 1–23. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-531-92534-9_12
Kafsh, S. Z. (2015). Developing consumer adoption model on
mobile wallet in Canada.
Kalinic, Z., & Marinkovic, V. (2016). Determinants of users’
intention to adopt m-commerce: An empirical analysis.
Information Systems and E-Business Management, 14(2),
367–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-015-0287-2
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1986). Technology adoption in
the presence of network externalities. Journal of Political
Economy, 94(4), 822–841.
Khalifa, M., & Shen, K. N. (2008). Explaining the adoption of
transactional B2C mobile commerce. Journal of Enterprise
Information Management, 21(2), 110–124. https://doi.org/
10.1108/17410390810851372
Khalilzadeh, J., Ozturk, A. B., & Bilgihan, A. (2017). Security-
related factors in extended UTAUT model for NFC based
mobile payment in the restaurant industry. Computers in
Human Behavior, 70(May 2017), 460–474. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.001
Khan, B. U. I., Olanrewaju, R. F., Baba, A. M., Langoo, A.
A., & Assad, S. (2017). A compendious study of online
payment systems: Past developments, present impact, and
future considerations. International Journal of Advanced
Computer Science and Applications, 8(5), 256–271. https://
doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2017.080532
Kim, H., Chan, H. C., & Gupta, S. (2007). Value-based adoption
of mobile internet: An empirical investigation. Decision
Support Systems, 43(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
dss.2005.05.009
Kim, M. J., Chung, N., & Lee, C. K. (2011). The effect of
perceived trust on electronic commerce: Shopping online
for tourism products and services in South Korea. Tourism
Management, 32(2), 256–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tourman.2010.01.011
Koenig-Lewis, N., Palmer, A., & Moll, A. (2010). Predicting
young consumers’ take up of mobile banking services.
International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28(5), 410–432.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02652321011064917
Kothari, S. (2018). 5 reasons why consumers still don’t use
digital payments. Retrieved June 30, 2020, from https://
economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/spend/5-reasons-
why-consumers-still-dont-use-digital-payments/articleshow/
64699938.cms
Kumar, A., Adlakaha, A., & Mukherjee, K. (2018). The effect of
perceived security and grievance redressal on continuance
intention to use M-wallets in a developing country.
International Journal of Bank Marketing, 36(7), 1170–1189.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-04-2017-0077
Kumar, G. S. G., Bijoy, A. P., & George, A. (2012). Effect of
service quality dimensions on adoption of internet banking—
An empirical investigation of customer’s perspectives in
Kerala. In International Conference on Business, Finance
and Geography (ICBFG’2012) December 18-19, Phuket
(Thailand).
Kumar, V., Nim, N., & Sharma, A. (2019). Driving growth of
Mwallets in emerging markets: A retailer’s perspective.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(4), 747–
769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-018-0613-6
Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Sánchez-Fernández, J., & Muñoz-Leiva,
F. (2014a). Antecedents of the adoption of the new mobile
payment systems: The moderating effect of age. Computers
in Human Behavior, 35, 464–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2014.03.022
Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Sánchez-Fernández, J., & Muñoz-
Leiva, F. (2014b). 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(2), 151–166. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.12.006
Limayem, M., Hirt, S. G., & Cheung, C. M. K. (2007). How
habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of
information systems continuance. MIS Quarterly, 31(4),
705–737. https://doi.org/10.1002/fut.10029
Lin, H.-F. (2007). Predicting consumer intentions to shop
online: An empirical test of competing theories. Electronic
Commerce Research and Applications, 6(4), 433–442. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2007.02.002
Lin, K.-Y., & Lu, H.-P. (2011). Why people use social networking
sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities
and motivation theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3),
1152–1161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.009
Liu, C., Guo, Y. M., & Lee, C. (2011). The effects of relationship
quality and switching barriers on customer loyalty.
International Journal of Information Management, 31(1),
71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.05.008
Lou, H., Luo, W., & Strong, D. (2000). Perceived critical mass
effect on groupware acceptance. European Journal of
Information Systems, 9, 91–103.
Lu, J., Liu, C., Yu, C.-S., & Wang, K. (2008). Determinants of
accepting wireless mobile data services in China. Information
& Management, 45(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
im.2007.11.002
Lu, Y., Yang, S., Chau, P. Y. K., & Cao, Y. (2011). Dynamics
between the trust transfer process and intention to use
mobile payment services: A cross-environment perspective.
Information & Management, 48(8), 393–403. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.im.2011.09.006
Madan, K., & Yadav, R. (2016). Behavioural intention to adopt
mobile wallet: A developing country perspective. Journal
of Indian Business Research, 8(3), 227–244. https://doi.
org/10.1108/JIBR-10-2015-0112
Madan, K., & Yadav, R. (2018). Understanding and predicting
antecedents of mobile shopping adoption: A developing
country perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
Logistics, 30(1), 139–162. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-
02-2017-0023
Markus, M. L. (1994). Electronic Mail as the medium of
managerial choice. Organization Science, 5(4), 502–527.
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.4.502
Martins, C., Oliveira, T., & Popovič, A. (2014). Understanding
the internet banking adoption: A unified theory of acceptance
and use of technology and perceived risk application.
International Journal of Information Management, 34(1),
1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.06.002
Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: Comparing the
Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned
Behavior. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 173–191.
Megadewandanu, S., Suyoto, & Pranowo. (2016). Exploring
mobile wallet adoption in Indonesia using UTAUT2: An
approach from consumer perspective. In 2nd International
96 IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review 10(1)
Conference on Science and Technology- Computer
(pp. 11–16).
Meyll, T., & Walter, A. (2018). Tapping and waving to debt:
Mobile payments and credit card behavior. Finance Research
Letters, 28(March), 381–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
frl.2018.06.009
Miltgen, C. L., Popovič, A., & Oliveira, T. (2013). Determinants
of end-user acceptance of biometrics: Integrating the ‘Big
3’ of technology acceptance with privacy context. Decision
Support Systems, 56(1), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
dss.2013.05.010
Mitra, S. (2019). Buy, sell or wind up—Small digital payments
firms face harsh reality. Retrieved June 20, 2020, from
https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/startup/buy-
sell-or-wind-up-small-digital-payments-firms-face-harsh-
reality-4575021.html
Mobile payment market: Global industry trends, share, size,
growth, opportunity and forecast 2020-2025. (n.d.). Retrieved
June 16, 2020, from https://www.imarcgroup.com/mobile-
payment-market
Montazemi, A. R., & Qahri-saremi, H. (2015). Factors affecting
adoption of online banking: A meta-analytic structural
equation modeling study. Information & Management, 52(2),
210–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.11.002
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an
instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an
information technology innovation. Information Systems
Research, 2(3), 192–223.
Natarajan, T., Balasubramanian, S. A., & Kasilingam, D. L.
(2017). Understanding the intention to use mobile shopping
applications and its influence on price sensitivity. Journal
of Retailing and Consumer Services, 37, 8–22. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.02.010
Oliveira, T., Faria, M., Thomas, M. A., & Popovič, A. (2014).
Extending the understanding of mobile banking adoption:
When UTAUT meets TTF and ITM. International Journal
of Information Management, 34(5), 689–703. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.06.004
Oliveira, T., Thomas, M., Baptista, G., & Campos, F. (2016).
Mobile payment: Understanding the determinants of customer
adoption and intention to recommend the technology.
Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 404–414. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.030
Ooi, K., & Tan, G. W. (2016). Mobile technology acceptance model:
An investigation using mobile users to explore smartphone
credit card. Expert Systems with Applications, 59(15 october),
33–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.04.015
Ouellette, J. A., & Wood, W. (1998). Habit and intention in
everyday life: The multiple processes by which past behavior
predicts future behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 124(1),
54–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.1.54
Pal, D., Vanijja, V., & Papasratorn, B. (2015). An empirical
analysis towards the adoption of NFC mobile payment system
by the end user. Procedia - Procedia Computer Science, 69,
13–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.10.002
Palepu, A. R., & Sharma, N. (2019). India’s top payment apps
spent close to $1 billion to lure customers in FY19. Retrieved
June 28, 2020, from https://www.bloombergquint.com/
business/indias-top-payment-apps-spent-close-to-1-billion-
to-lure-customers-in-fy19
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A
conceptual model of service quality and its implications for
future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41–50.
Patel, V. (2016). Use of mobile wallet service by the youth: A
study based in Ahmedabad. ASBM Journal of Management,
9(2), 50–61.
Pathirana, P. A., & Azam, F. S. M. (2017). Factors influencing the
use of mobile payments—A conceptual model. In National
Information Technology Conference (pp. 67–74).
Pietro, L. Di, Mugion, R. G., Mattia, G., Renzi, M. F., & Toni, M.
(2015). The Integrated Model on Mobile Payment Acceptance
(IMMPA): An empirical application to public transport.
Transportation Research Part C, 56, 463–479. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.trc.2015.05.001
Rai, G. (2019). Mobile wallet transactions increased 40 times
in India in five years. Retrieved June 20, 2020, from
https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/india/mobile-wallet-
transactions-increased-40-times-in-india-in-five-years-
gulshan-rai-3517601.html
Ramos-de-luna, I., Montoro-Rıos, F., & Liebana-Cabanillas, F.
(2016). Determinants of the intention to use NFC technology
as a payment system: An acceptance model approach.
Information Systems and E-Business Management, 14, 293–
314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-015-0284-5
Rao, S., & Troshani, I. (2007). A conceptual framework and
propositions for the acceptance of mobile services. Journal
of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research,
2(2), 61–73.
Reiss, D. G. (2018). Is money going digital? An alternative
perspective on the current hype. Reiss Financial Innovation,
4(14), 1–6.
Resolve your mobile wallets complaints with issuer’s ombudsman
first before going to RBI. (2019). Retrieved June 20, 2020,
from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/personal-
finance-news/large-ppi-issuers-will-have-to-set-up-internal-
ombudsman-rbi/articleshow/71436005.cms
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffuison of Innovations. Elements of
Diffusion 3rd. Edition. https://doi.org/citeulike-article-
id:126680
Sahut, J.-M. (2008). The adoption and diffusion of electronic
wallets. International Journal of Economics and
Management Engineering, 2(5), 525–528. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&profile=
ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=12045357&AN
=32866244&h=gg2qhNhqwZbiajGPFbHLivhYr8D0DKPlke
VdU17GiCCtI+/tdjECA0h/RCSglDBXVYxq5G8fg5KSnAn
6+I1PGQ==&crl=c
Salisbury, W. D., Pearson, R. A., Pearson, A. W., & Miller, D.
W. (2003). Perceived security and world wide web purchase
intention. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 101(4),
165–176.
Sarmah, B., Rahman, Z., & Kamboj, S. (2017). Customer
co-creation and adoption intention towards newly developed
services: An empirical study. International Journal of
Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 11(3), 372–391.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-07-2016-0070
Schierz, P. G., Schilke, O., & Wirtz, B. W. (2010). Understanding
consumer acceptance of mobile payment services: An
empirical analysis. Electronic Commerce Research and
Applications, 9(3), 209–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.
2009.07.005
Schurr, P. H., & Ozanne, J. L. (1985). Influences on exchange
processes: Buyers’ preconceptions of a seller’ s trustworthiness
George and Sunny 97
and bargaining toughness. Journal of Consumer Research,
11(4), 939–953.
Seetharaman, A., Kumar, K. N., Palaniappan, S., & Weber, G.
(2017). Factors influencing behavioural intention to use the
mobile wallet in Singapore. Journal of Applied Economics
and Business Research, 7(2), 116–136.
Sharma, R., & Mishra, R. (2014). A review of evolution of theories
and models of technology adoption. The Indore Management
Journal, 6(2), 17–29.
Shaw, N. (2014). The mediating influence of trust in the adoption
of the mobile wallet. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 21(4), 449–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.
2014.03.008
Shin, D.-H. (2009). Towards an understanding of the consumer
acceptance of mobile wallet. Computers in Human Behavior,
25(6), 1343–1354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.06.001
Siau, K., & Shen, Z. (2003). Building customer trust in mobile
commerce. Communications of the ACM, 46(4), 91–94.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2000)1
Singh, N., Srivastava, S., & Sinha, N. (2017). Consumer
preference and satisfaction of M-wallets: A study on North
Indian consumers. International Journal of Bank Marketing,
35(6), 944–965. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-06-2016-0086
Singh, S., & Srivastava, R. K. (2018). Predicting the intention to
use mobile banking in India. International Journal of Bank
Marketing, 36(2), 357–378. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-
12-2016-0186
Sivathanu, B. (2019). Adoption of digital payment systems in the
era of demonetization in India: An empirical study. Journal
of Science and Technology Policy Management, 10(1), 143–
171. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-07-2017-0033
Slade, E., Williams, M., Dwivedi, Y., & Piercy, N. (2015).
Exploring consumer adoption of proximity mobile payments.
Journal of Strategic Marketing, 23(3), 209–223. https://doi.
org/10.1080/0965254X.2014.914075
Sobti, N. (2019). Impact of demonetization on diffusion of mobile
payment service in India: Antecedents of behavioral intention
and adoption using extended UTAUT model. Journal of
Advances in Management Research, 16(4), 472–497. https://
doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-09-2018-0086
Sumathy, M., & KP, V. (2017). Digital payment systems:
Perception and concerns among urban consumers.
International Journal of Applied Research, 3(6), 1118–1122.
Swilley, E. (2016). Technology rejection: The case of the wallet
phone. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27(4), 304–312.
https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761011052341
Tang, C. Y., Lai, C. C., Law, C. W., Liew, M. C., & Phua, V.
V. (2014). Examining key determinants of mobile wallet
adoption intention in Malaysia: An empirical study using
the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology 2
model. International Journal of Modelling in Operations
Management, 4(3/4), 248–265. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmom.
2014.067383
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding Information
Technology usage: A test of competing models. Information
Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176.
Thong, J. Y. L., Hong, S. J., & Tam, K. Y. (2006). The effects
of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation
model for information technology continuance. International
Journal of Human Computer Studies, 64(9), 799–810. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.05.001
Tingchi Liu, M., Brock, J. L., Cheng Shi, G., Chu, R., & Tseng,
T. H. (2013). Perceived benefits, perceived risk, and trust:
Influences on consumers’ group buying behaviour. Asia
Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 25(2), 225–248.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13555851311314031
Tsai, J. Y., Egelman, S., Cranor, L., & Acquisti, A. (2011). The
effect of online privacy information on purchasing behavior:
An experimental study. Information Systems Research, 22(2),
254–268. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1090.0260
Van Slyke, C., Ilie, V., Lou, H., & Stafford, T. (2007). Perceived
critical mass and the adoption of a communication technology.
European Journal of Information Systems, 16(3), 270–283.
https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000680
Vasantha, S., & Sarika, P. (2019). Empirical analysis of
demographic factors affecting intention to use mobile
wallet. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced
Technology, 8(6S), 768–776. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.
F1149.0886S19
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003).
User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified
view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer
acceptance and use of information technology: Extending
the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS
Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.
Venugopal, P., Jinka, S., & Priya, S. A. (2016). User acceptance of
electronic health records: Cross validation of UTAUT model.
Sona Global Management Review, 10(3), 42–54.
Verplanken, B., Aarts, H., & Knippenberg, V. A. (1997). Habit,
information aquisition, and the process of making travel mode
choices. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27(5), 539–
560. Retrieved from papers3://publication/uuid/48bbbb11-
e6d8-4be5-b989-95fbae0d4b91
Wang, Y., & Liao, Y. (2008). Understanding individual adoption
of mobile booking service: An empirical investigation.
Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(5), 603–605. https://doi.
org/10.1089/cpb.2007.0203
Wei, T. T., Marthandan, G., Chong, A. Y.-L., Ooi, K.-B., &
Arumugam, S. (2009). What drives Malaysian m-commerce
adoption? An empirical analysis. Industrial Management
and Data Systems, 109(3), 370–388. https://doi.org/
10.1108/02635570910939399
Wilson, D. T. (1990). An integrated model of buyer-seller
relationships. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
23(4), 335–345.
Wong, C. H., Lee, H. S., Lim, Y. H., Chua, B. H., & Tan, G. W.
(2012). Predicting the consumers’ intention to adopt mobile-
shopping: An emerging market perspective. International
Journal of Network and Mobile Technologies, 3(3), 24–39.
Wu, J.-H., & Wang, S.-C. (2005). What drives mobile commerce?
An empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance
model. Information & Management, 42(5), 719–729. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2004.07.001
Wu, K., Zhao, Y., Zhu, Q., Tan, X., & Zheng, H. (2011). A meta-
analysis of the impact of trust on technology acceptance
model: Investigation of moderating influence of subject
and context type. International Journal of Information
Management, 31(6), 572–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijinfomgt.2011.03.004
98 IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review 10(1)
Xin, H. (2013). Exploring the influence of trust and culture on
mobile payment adoption.
Yang, A. S. (2009). Exploring adoption difficulties in mobile
banking services. Canadian Journal of Administrative
Sciences, 26(2), 136–149.
Yang, S., Lu, Y., Gupta, S., Cao, Y., & Zhang, R. (2012). Mobile
payment services adoption across time: An empirical study
of the effects of behavioral beliefs, social influences, and
personal traits. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 129–
142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.019
Yang, Y., Liu, Y., Li, H., & Yu, B. (2015). Understanding perceived
risks in mobile payment acceptance. Industrial Management
& Data Systems, 115(2), 253–269. https://doi.org/10.1108/
IMDS-08-2014-0243
Zhou, T. (2013). An empirical examination of continuance intention
of mobile payment services. Decision Support Systems, 54(2),
1085–1091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.10.034
Zmijewska, A., & Lawrence, E. (2005). Reshaping the frame-
work for analysing success of mobile payment solutions.
Proceedings of the IADIS Conference E-Commerce, 203–210.