Feb Fatimatul Lail

THE ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL’S BEHAVIORAL INTENTION AND
USE BEHAVIOR IN USING OVO BASED ON UTAUT 2
BY:
FATIMATUL LAIL
155020307121028
MINOR THESIS
Submitted as One of Requirements to Achieve Bachelor Degree of Accounting
INTERNATIONAL UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM IN ACCOUNTING

FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS
UNIVERSITAS BRAWIJAYA
MALANG
2019
APPROVAL PAGE
i
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY
ii
LETTER OF RESEARCH
iii
iv
RESUME
Name : Fatimatul Lail
Date of Birth : Gresik, 28 Mei 1997
Address : Jalan Bunga Merak no.55, Malang, 65141
Email Address : fatimatullail28@gmail.com
Phone Number : +62 82139427809
I. Education
- Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business
Universitas Brawijaya, Malang (2015 – present)
- SMA Negeri 1 Gresik (2012-2015)
- SMP Negeri 3 Gresik (2009 – 2012)
- SD Nahdlatul Ulama 1 Trate Gresik (2003-2009)
II. Professional Experience and Organizations

- Internship program in Finance Department at PT. Garuda
Indonesia (Persero) Tbk – Malang, November 2018
- 5 Finalists Deloitte Indonesia Brand Ambassador 2018
- ACCA Campus Brand Ambassador 2018
- Assistant of PKNU International Summer School 2016 Faculty of
Economics and Business, Brawijaya University
- Human Resources Department Staff, in HMJA FEB UB 2016
III. Competition
- 2nd Place of Indonesian Debating Competition Equilibrium
Science Fair 2016, Faculty of Economics and Business, Udayana
University, Bali
v
IV. Committee
- Brawijaya Accounting Fair 2018 as a Liaison Officer Coordinator
- Brawijaya Accounting Fair 2017 as a Liaison Officer Assistant
Coordinator
- Gebyar Akuntansi 2017 as an Event Coordinator
- INTERAKSI 2016 as a Supervisor Staff
- Gebyar Akuntansi 2016 as a Marketing Staff
- Accounting Meeting 2016 as a PDD Coordinator
V. Seminar
- Brawijaya Accounting Fair 2015 entitled “Facing New Challenges
and Opportunities of Asian Pacific Economic Integration”
VI. Skills
- English and Indonesian Language
- Ms. Office
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, the author praises God, the almighty for providing me
the opportunity and granting me the capability to complete this minor thesis
entitled “THE ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL‟S BEHAVIORAL INTENTION
AND USE BEHAVIOR IN USING OVO BASED ON UTAUT 2”. This minor
thesis writing is primarily aimed at meeting the requirement to achieve the Degree
of Bachelor in Economics majoring in Accounting at Faculty of Economics and
Business, Brawijaya University.
The completion of this minor thesis would not have been possible without
the helps, supports and prayers from other people. Therefore, I would like to
deliver my sincere appreciation and gratitude to the following parties:
1. Dr. Zaki Baridwan, Ak., CA., CPA., CLI., as the supervisor and respected
lecturer, who has guided me throughout my thesis with his patience and
knowledge. Without him this thesis would not have been completed;
2. Drs. Imam Subekti, Ak., M.Si., Ph.D., as the first examiner and Head of
International Accounting Department, who has supported the author to
immediately resolve this minor thesis;
3. Luthfi Harris, SE., M.Ak., Ak., as the second examiner who supportively
contributes to the completion of this minor thesis;
4. Yeney Widya Prihatiningtias, SE., MSA., Ak., DBA., as the former Head of
International Accounting Department and a very good lecturer of mine;
vii
5. Dr. Roekhudin, SE., M.Si., Ak., CA., CSRS., as the Head of Accounting
Department; who gives continuous support to all of the accounting students;
6. Drs. Nurkholis, M.Bus.(Acc)., Ak., Ph.D., as the Dean of Economics and
Business Faculty; who gives the opportunity for the students to develop their
ability and knowledge in the field of economics;
7. Mrs. Ainun Nikmah, S.Pd. and Mrs. Rahma Ayu Puspita A.Md. in the
international office for being very helpful during the completion of this minor
thesis and the study of the author;
8. I certainly could not accomplish without my family‟s unconditional and
countless support, especially my parents, Muh. Luthfi and Lis Shofawati, as
well as my brother Muhammad Daffa Luthfi, my aunties and uncles, for their
advices, thoughts, loves, well-wished prayer and supports for all these years;
9. My boyfriend and best partner ever, Jodi Windrawan Putra, for always
supporting me patiently through the ups and downs and giving me his back,
while finishing this last challenging semester.
10. All of my best friends since primary, junior, and high school, Abdullah Zen,
Andrias, Zakhruvia, Gabrillah, Tandia, Neni, Niken, Yusril, Mukhson, Yusron,
Syihab, Boncu, Pepep, Ripe, Depo, Iza, Firda, Masita, Tita, Mira, Leni,
Sholikatin, Rana, Acus, Acas, Arini, Angga, Igo, Salsa, Mba Dini, Mba Rika,
Mba Jihan, Widya, Aqil, Ersa, Ai, Maldini, Annesh, Falaq, Anggit, Zanet,
Verrel, Afi, Nandi, Abida, Mba Diba, Wulan, Duo Dias, Nydia, Kei, Beni,
Firman, Rama, Kya, Iyul, Yasmin, Yani, for always being supportive and
viii
reliable during the years we spent together and through the process of writing
this thesis;
10. All of my special friends in Himpunan Mahasiswa Jurusan Akuntansi for
providing me with unfailing support and continuous encouragement throughout
my years of study;
11. Other people who cannot be named one by one, but they have given valuable
help and support in finishing this research, I would thank you all for the
attention and encouragement given to me during my study here.
The author realizes that this minor thesis has a lot of weaknesses.
Therefore, constructive criticsm and suggestion are much to improve our
knowledge in the future. Finally, the writer hopes that this minor thesis can be of
much help for many people. Amen.
Malang, January 13th 2018
Author,
Fatimatul Lail
NIM. 155020307121028
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL PAGE ................................................................................................. i

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ........................................................................ ii
LETTER OF RESEARCH ..................................................................................... iii
RESUME ................................................................................................................ v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................... vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................ x
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................... xiv
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................ xvii
CHAPTER I ............................................................................................................ 1
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Research Background ................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Research Questions ................................................................................................... 7
1.3 Research Objective .................................................................................................... 8
1.4 Research Contributions ............................................................................................. 8
1.5 Systematic Organization of the Minor Thesis........................................................ 9
CHAPTER II ........................................................................................................... 2
LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT ..................... 2
2.1. Accounting Information Systems ........................................................................... 2
2.1.1. Information Systems .............................................................................. 2
2.1.2. Accounting Information Systems ........................................................ 15
2.2. Electronic Money (e-money) ................................................................................ 18
2.2.1. Electronic Money (e-money) ............................................................... 18
2.2.2. Mobile Wallet (m-wallet) .................................................................... 20
2.3. OVO ......................................................................................................................... 20
2.3.1. Definition ............................................................................................. 20
2.3.2. Brief Guide .......................................................................................... 22
2.3.3. Product of OVO Club and OVO Premier ............................................ 23
2.3.4. Loyalty Program Cooperation ............................................................. 24
x
2.4. UTAUT (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology) ................. 25
2.5. UTAUT2 (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology2) ............. 26
2.6. Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses Development ..................................... 28
2.6.1. The Effect of Performance Expectancy on Individual‟s Behavioral
Intention to Use OVO 30
2.6.2. The Effect of Effort Expectancy on Individual‟s Behavioral Intention
to Use OVO 32
2.6.3. The Effect of Social Influence on Individual‟s Behavioral Intention to
Use OVO 33
2.6.4. The Effect of Price Value on Individual‟s Behavior Intention to Use
OVO 35
2.6.5. The Effect of Hedonic Motivation on Individual‟s Behavioral Intention
to Use OVO 37
2.6.6. The Effect of Habit on Individual‟s Behavioral Intention to Use OVO
....................................................................................................................... 38
2.6.7. The Effect of Behavioral Intention on OVO Customer‟s Use Behavior
....................................................................................................................... 39
CHAPTER III ....................................................................................................... 42
RESEARCH METHOD ........................................................................................ 42
3.1. Research Design ..................................................................................................... 42
3.2. Population and Sample .......................................................................................... 43
3.3. Research Data and Sources ................................................................................... 45
3.3.1. Sources of Data .................................................................................... 45
3.3.2. Data Collection Method ....................................................................... 46
3.4. Definition, Indicators, and Variables Measures Research ................................ 47
3.4.1. Performance Expectancy ..................................................................... 47
3.4.2. Effort Expectancy ................................................................................ 48
3.4.3. Social Influence ................................................................................... 49
3.4.4. Price Value ........................................................................................... 50
3.4.5. Hedonic Motivation ............................................................................. 51
3.4.6. Habit..................................................................................................... 51
3.4.7. Behavioral Intention ............................................................................ 52
3.4.8. Use Behaviour...................................................................................... 53
3.5. Structural Equation ................................................................................................. 56
xi
3.6. Model Evaluation.................................................................................................... 58
3.6.1. Evaluation of Measurement Model (Outer Model) ............................. 59
3.6.2 Evaluation of Structural Model (Inner Model) ............................... 61
3.7. Pilot Test .................................................................................................................. 62
CHAPTER IV ....................................................................................................... 66
FINDING AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................ 66
4.1 Results of Data Collection ...................................................................................... 66
4.1.1 Respondents .......................................................................................... 66
4.1.2 Demographic Characteristics ................................................................ 67
4.1.3 Descriptive Statistics ....................................................................... 74
4.1.4 Evaluation Model .................................................................................. 80
4.2 Hypothesis Testing .................................................................................................. 86
4.3 Discussion and Results............................................................................................ 92
4.3.1 Performance Expectancy on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H1) .. 93
4.3.2 Effort Expectancy on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H2) ............. 95
4.3.3 Social Influence on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H3) ................ 97
4.3.4 Price Value on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H4) ........................ 99
4.3.5 Hedonic Motivation on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H5) ........ 101
4.3.6 Habit on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H6)................................ 103
4.3.7 Behavioral Intention to OVO Customers‟ Use Behavior ................... 104
CHAPTER V....................................................................................................... 106
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION .................................................. 106
5.1 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 106
5.2 Research Implications ........................................................................................... 108
5.3 Research Limitations ............................................................................................. 109
REFERENCES.................................................................................................... 111
APPENDICIES ................................................................................................... 118
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................... 118
KUESIONER PENELITIAN ................................................................................. 124
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
No. List of Tables Page
2.1 The Four Core Determinants of UTAUT ..................................................26

2.2 UTAUT 2 Model........................................................................................28
2.3 Research Framework..................................................................................29
3.1 The structural model of research................................................................58
4.1 Composition of Respondents based on Gender.........................................68
4.2 Composition of Respondents based on Age...............................................69

4.3 Composition of Respondents based on Semester.......................................71
4.4 Composition of Respondents based on The
duration.......................................................................................................72
4.5 Composition of Respondents based on
Frequency...................................................................................................74
4.6 Algorithm Model........................................................................................86
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
No List of Figures Page
3.1 Construction Indicators............................................................................. 54

3.2 The Validity and Reliability Test Parameters in PLS Measurement
Model......................................................................................................... 61
3.3 Algorithm (Pilot Test)............................................................................... 63
3.4 Outer Loadings (Pilot Test)....................................................................... 64
4.1 Sample, Usable Responses, and Responses Rate...................................... 57
4.2 The Composition of Respondents based on Gender................................. 68

4.3 The Composition of Respondents based on Age...................................... 69
4.4 The Composition of Respondents based on Semester.............................. 70
4.5 The Composition of Respondents based on the Duration......................... 72
4.6 The Composition of Respondents based on Frequency............................ 73
4.7 Frequency Distribution of Peformance
Expectancy................................................................................................ 75
4.8 Frequency Distribution of Effort
Expectancy................................................................................................ 76
4.9 Frequency Distribution of Social
Influence................................................................................................... 77
4.10 Frequency Distribution of Price
Value........................................................................................................ 77
4.11 Frequency Distribution of Hedonic
Motivation................................................................................................. 78
4.12 Frequency Distribution of
Habit.......................................................................................................... 79
4.13 Frequency Distribution of Behavioral
Intention..................................................................................................... 79
4.14 Frequency Distribution of Use
Behavior.................................................................................................... 80
4.15 Table of Algorithm.................................................................................... 81
xiv
4.16 Outer Loadings.......................................................................................... 82
4.17 Cross Loadings.......................................................................................... 84
4.18 T-Statistics Value...................................................................................... 87
4.19 Summary of Hypothesis Testing.............................................................. 92
xv
LIST OF APENDICES
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................... 118

KUESIONER PENELITIAN.............................................................................. 124
xvi
THE ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL’S BEHAVIORAL INTENTION AND
USE BEHAVIOR IN USING OVO BASED ON UTAUT 2
By: Fatimatul Lail
Supervisor: Dr. Zaki Baridwan, Ak., CA., CPA., CLI
ABSTRACT
Cashless lifestyle has rapidly gained its popularity with the introduction of e-
wallet as an innovation form of e-money such as OVO to enhance an effective and
efficient means of transaction. However, the successful implementation of OVO
as an e-wallet largely depends on the extent of how the customers are fully
motivated to adopt it. The purpose of this research is to examine the factors which
influence the behavioral intention and use behavior to utilize OVO. The proposed
model has factors from Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2
(UTAUT 2). This research applies a quantitative research and the data are
collected by employing survey method (questionnaires). The respondents
comprise of 328 undergraduate active students from accounting department in
Faculty of Economics and Business, Brawijaya University. The research data and
hypothesis are analyzed by using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) based on
Partial Least Square (PLS). The research findings mainly indicate that behavioral
intention to utilize mobile banking is significantly and positively influenced by
performance expectancy, hedonic motivation, and habit. It is equally important
that behavioral intention also has a strong and positive effect towards use
behavior. In contrast, effort expectancy, social influence, and price value do not
affect the uses‟ behavioral intention to use OVO. Thus, it can be concluded that
higher performance expectancy, hedonic motivation and habit, will highly affect
the intention to use OVO, and higher behavioral intention will highly impact the
use behavior of using OVO.
Keywords: E-money, E-wallet, Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy,

Social Influence, Price Value, Hedonic Motivation, Behavioral Intention, Use
behavior
xvii
ANALISIS MINAT PENGGUNAAN DAN PERILAKU PENGGUNAAN
INDIVIDU DALAM MENGGUNAKAN OVO BERDASARKAN UTAUT 2
Oleh: Fatimatul Lail
Pembimbing: Dr. Zaki Baridwan, Ak., CA., CPA., CLI
ABSTRAK
Gaya hidup Cashless bertumbuh sangat pesat. Dompet elektronik yang merupakan
sebuah inovasi atas uang elektronik seperti OVO dapat mebuat transaksi kita
menjadi lebih efektif dan efisien. Namun, keberhasilan penerapan OVO sebagian
besar tergantung pada seberapa banyak konsumen yang termotivasi penuh untuk
mengadopsinya. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menguji faktor-faktor yang
mempengaruhi minat perilaku dan perilaku penggunaan konsumen untuk
menggunakan OVO. Model yang diusulkan memiliki faktor-faktor dari Unified
Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2). Penelitian ini
merupakan penelitian kuantitatif dan data dikumpulkan menggunakan metode
survei, yaitu kuesioner. Responden adalah 328 mahasiswa S1 aktif dari jurusan
akuntansi Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Brawijaya University. Data penelitian
dan hipotesis dianalisis menggunakan model persamaan struktural (SEM)
berdasarkan Partial Least Squares (PLS). Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan
bahwa minat perilaku untuk menggunakan mobile banking dipengaruhi secara
signifikan dan positif oleh Ekspektai kinerja, Motivasi Hedonis dan Kebiasaan,
serta, minat perilaku juga mempunyai pengaruh yang kuat dan positif terhadap
perilaku penggunaan dari pengguna OVO. Sebaliknya, ekspektasi usaha,
pengaruh sosial, dan nilai harga tidak memengaruhi minat perilaku pengguna
untuk menggunakan OVO. Dengan demikian, dapat disimpulkan bahwa semakin
tinggi oleh Ekspektai kinerja, Motivasi Hedonis dan Kebiasaan, semakin tinggi
efek terhadap minat untuk menggunakan OVO, dan semakin tinggi minat untuk
menggunakan OVO, semakin tinggi efek terhadap perilaku pengguna dalam
menggunakan OVO.
xviii
Kata Kunci: Ekspektasi Kinerja, Ekspektasi Usaha, Pengaruh Sosial, Nilai
Harga, Motivasi Hedonis, Kebiasaan, Minat Perilaku dan Perilaku Penggunaan
OVO
xix
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Research Background
Nowadays, technology has been rapidly developing and playing an
important role in people‟s life. The growth of Information is very significant
which gives the flexibility and versatility services to pursue efficiency in all
aspects. Information and communication technology provides tremendous
benefits by changing the way people live, communicate, work and do
transaction. This phenomenon is encouraged by the existance of Internet as
can be seen from the data, gathered by APJII (Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa
Internet Indonesia) stating that if the number of internet users in Indonesia
in 2017 was 143.26 million people (54.68% from 262 million people use
internet) . In the light of the existence of Internet, people manage everything
easily, including financial transaction.
Accounting information system is defined as a model and human
resource in an organization which is responsible to prepare financial
information. In one accounting cycle, a revenue cycle acts as a group of
business activity and repeatedly processes related information by serving
goods and services to the customers and by collecting cash as a payment
from the sales (Romney & Stainbert, 2015), which contains sales order
entry, shipping, billing and accounts receivable, and cash collection.
The growth of the Internet, in the last years, has created an electronic
market place for goods and services. Selling tangible goods has not been
1
2
the only way to get income, as today‟s many sites offer intangible goods.
Producers will sell executable programs, images, music or videos over the
Internet and will electronically deliver the offered contents. Electronic
payment system plays an important role in this virtual market place. For
security consideration, cryptographic primitives are utilized in electronic
payment system. If a payment system is to succeed on the Internet, the
computational efforts in using these primitives are demanded to be
optimized. Several authors (Zheng 1997), (Anand & Madhavan 2000),
(Steve Glassman & Sobalvarro 1995), (He & TC-Wu 1999), (Hwang &
Sung 2006), (Erik-Oliver Blass & Strufe 2009) proposed schemes for
electronic payment systems. The existence of electronic payment system
introduces and provides a different touch in the revenue cycle of company
in collecting cash.
E-money is defined as a transaction system, in which all the financial
data including balance are saved in operator server / bank and in the card‟s
chip. In this case, e-money is better recognized in a card form. Generally, by
using e-money, the users (consumers) receive advantages especially in
saving the amount of time energy as e-money users do no longer need to
carry cash (not confused with the change of money). E-money also provides
convenience and security. Customers are also more comfortable as they are
no longer required to carry cash to make transactions. Thus, the customers
are more facilitated in carrying out banking activities without limits in time
and space.
3
Following the growth of nowadays‟ electronic money, cashless
lifestyle has become a trend. It can be proven with the appearance of digital
wallet or Electronic Wallet (e-wallet) as an innovation of electronic money.
E-wallet is a part of e-money which saves the data holder in a server, but the
holder can also save their financial data, including balance in their e-wallet
from their own smartphone. The consumen can use their smartphone to do
payment or to buy card-less product. Data of the holder is already saved in
telecommunication operator server, leaving the holder to not bring cash to
conduct any financial transaction.
An e-wallet becomes a secure place which contains one or more
currency pursues. Fortunately, the costumers might fund the e-wallet in
different way. Purchasing online items from a computer or a smartphone is
frequently applied to purchase actual goods at store. Additionally, the
credentials can be passed to a merchant‟s terminal wirelessly via Near Field
Communication (NFC). Therefore, digital wallet or e-wallet does not only
provide basic financial transactions but also authorizes the holder‟s
credentials (for example: e-wallet could verify the age of the buyer to the
store when purchasing alcohol related product).
As a result of this phenomenon, there are several popular e-wallets in
Indonesia. Based on cermati.com, the most wanted e-money providers in
Indonesia are Sakuku BCA, T-Cash, TapCash BNI, OVO, Go-Pay, Brizzi
BRI, Flazz BCA, e-Money Mandiri, Doku Wallet, and Indomaret Card.
OVO appears as one of digital wallet platform which attracts considerable
number of customers in the blink of eye. Through Android (OS 4.2 and
4
above) and iPhone (iOS 8.0 and above), customers utilize OVO for easier
transaction. Recently, the President Director of OVO, Adrian Suherman,
through pers and in detik.com, stated that OVO has approximately 350
thousand merchants, and it does exist in more than 400 malls in Indonesia.
Although OVO has many merchants and offers big amount of discount,
based on the published data in 2017, OVO still has a very small number of
users, which stated that 50% of e-money users used Go-Pay, 46% used e-
money from Mandiri Bank , 42% used T-Cash from Telkomsel, 25% used
Flazz from BCA Bank, 17% used LINE pay from Line, 15% used OVO
from Lippo, and 12% used BRIZZI from BRI (Databoks, katadata,
Indonesia, 2017).
The number of e-wallet users in Indonesia, as stated above,
encourages the providers of e-wallet to market their product to the
customers, especially to the potential market targets which are students.
Nowadays, students and young generations are always exposed in
understanding new technology to assist them in running daily activities as
well as personally financial arrangements.
Nevertheless, there are existing customers in Indonesia, some of
whom are in Brawijaya University which have not yet used OVO. The
success of OVO adoption depends on the rate of consumer acceptance and
continuous use of OVO. Therefore, this gap is used as a motivation in
conducting a research to understand the factors which may affect the
behavioral intention and use behavior to adopt and use OVO. By doing so,
5
the company is expected to consider certain required aspects to be improved
as well as to optimize customer‟s acceptance of OVO.
This research applies the development theory of Unified Theory of
Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), which is UTAUT 2 due to
its uniqueness and relevance with the topic about adopting cashless lifestyle.
The researcher adds 3 new variables such as habit, hedonic motivation, and
price value providing new insights into factors affecting behavioral intention
and use behavior to use OVO. This research combines the variables from
previous research of Alalwan et al. (2017) applying Performance
Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, Social Influence, Price Value, Hedonic
Motivation, Habit from UTAUT 2 and Behavioral Intention with the
reserach from Chopdar et al. (2018) employing Use Behavior as the
dependent variable. Researcher will conduct the research by using the
variables mentioned on the undergraduate accounting students in Faculty of
Economic and Business, Brawijaya University, Malang.
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use Technology 2 (UTAUT 2) is
the extension model of Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of
Technology (UTAUT). UTAUT was first introduced by Venkatesh et al.
(2003) with performance, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating
conditions as the factors to explain user intentions in utilizing an
information system and subsequent usage behavior within organizational
context. The latest model is UTAUT 2 proposed by Venkatesh et al. (2012)
which mentioned several factors to research acceptance and use of
technology in a consumer context. UTAUT 2 incorporates three constructs

6
into UTAUT, which are: hedonic motivation, price value, and habit.
Altogether, UTAUT 2 has performance expectancy, effort expectancy,
social influence, facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation, price value and
habit as the factors. However, the researcher will only apply six out of seven
variables from UTAUT 2 which are: performance expectancy, effort
expectancy, social influence, habit, hedonic motivation, and price value to
determine behavioral intention and use behavior to use OVO.
Various results of research were previously conducted by using
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) theory.
Zhou et al. (2010) conducted a research by integrating task technology fit
(TTF) model and the unified theory of acceptance and usage of technology
(UTAUT) finding out that performance expectancy, task technology fit,
social influence, and facilitating conditions have significant effects on user
adoption. Furthermore, a research by Foon and Fah (2011) showed that
performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and social influence, influenced
the intention to use internet banking among Malaysian. In addition, a
research by Tarhini et al. (2016) found that performance expectancy and
social influence were fit to be significant predictors in influencing
customer‟s behavioral intention to utilize internet banking.
Moreover, a research using UTAUT 2 and trust was conducted by
Alalwan et al.(2017) to examine the factors influencing the behavioral
intention to adopt mobile banking by Jordanian bank customers. The results
mainly show that behavioral intention is significantly and positively
influenced by performance expectancy, effort expectancy, hedonic

7
motivation, and price value. Price value has a positive impact on behavioral
intention if customers perceive that benefits of using a mobile banking are
greater than the costs. In contrast, a research by Baptista & Oliveira (2015)
showed that only performance expectancy, hedonic motivation, and habit
were found to be the most significant antecedents of behavior intention.
Based on the description above, the researcher composed her minor
thesis entitled "The Analysis of Individuals' Behavioral Intention and
Use Behavior in Using OVO Based on UTAUT 2”
1.2 Research Questions
Based on the aforementioned description, the research problems are
stated as follows:
1. Does Performance Expectancy (PE) positively affect the intention to use
OVO as a digital payment platform?
2. Does Effort Expectancy (EE) positively affect the intention to use OVO
as a digital payment platform?
3. Does Social Influence (SI) positively affect the intention to use OVO as a
digital payment platform?
4. Does Price/Value (PV) positively affect the intention to use OVO as a
digital payment platform?
5. Does Hedonic Motivation (HM) positively affect the intention to use
OVO as a digital payment platform?
6. Does Habit (H) positively affect the intention to use OVO as a digital
payment platform?
8
7. Does Behavioral Intention (BI) positively affect OVO user‟s Use
Behavior?
1.3 Research Objective
The purpose of this study is to obtain empirical results, including:
1. To examine the effect of Performance Expectancy (PE) on behavioral
intention of using OVO.
2. To examine the effect of Effort Expectancy (EE) on behavioral intention
of using OVO.
3. To examine the effect of Social Influence (SI) on behavioral intention of
using OVO.
4. To examine the effect of Price/Value (P/V) on behavioral intention of
using OVO.
5. To examine the effect of Hedonic Motivation (HM) on behavioral
intention of using OVO.
6. To examine the effect of Habit (H) on behavioral intention of using
OVO.
7. To examine the effect of Behavioral Intention (BI) on OVO customer‟s
Use Behavior.
1.4 Research Contributions
The research results are expected to contribute to:
a. Theoretical Contribution
This research is a combination of two previous studies which employ
performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, price value,
habit, hedonic motivation, and behavioral intention in accordance with

9
Alalwan et al. (2017) and Chopdar et al. (2018) research. The result of
this research gives empirical evidence to develop UTAUT 2 (Unified
Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2) as the factors affecting
the behavioral intention and use behavior to utilize mobile wallet.
b. Practical Contribution
This research contributes to the management of mobile wallet
providers to understand the factors that influence behavioral intention
and use behavior of mobile wallet. Furthermore, this research is expected
to be a reference in developing and innovating electronic wallet system
and mobile wallet usage as a media for future payment transactions.
1.5 Systematic Organization of the Minor Thesis
To facilitate the discussion and review which can provide a more
detailed description and direction, this minor thesis is organized into five
chapters, which are structured as follow:
CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes the background of the research,
research questions, research objectives, research
contribution and systematic discussion.
CHAPTER II : LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter identifies the theoretical basis, variables,
Conceptual framework and hypotheses related to the topic.
CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter explains the methods used in the research that
include type of research, data collection method,

10
population and sample, research variable and
measurement, hypothesis development, data analysis
method, and analysis technique.
CHAPTER IV : FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter outlines the result and the analysis on data
and the obtained empirical research.
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter explains the enclosing of research consisting
of the conclusions of research, the limitations of the
research and implication for future studies.

CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
2.1. Accounting Information Systems
2.1.1. Information Systems
A system is defined as a group of two or more interrelated
components or subsystems, serving a common purpose (Hall, 2011:5).
Another definition is also stated by Romney and Steinbart (2015:29) stating
that a system is a set of two or more interrelated components which interact
to achieve a goal. Furthermore, O‟Brien & Marakas (2011:4) defined a
system as a set of interrelated components, with a clearly defined boundary,
working together to achieve a common set of objectives.
Basically, to achieve the goals and objectives, a system has three
elements which have their respective functions, which include: input,
process and output (O‟Brien & Marakas, 2011:26). Input involves capturing
and assembling transformation processes which convert input into output.
Output involves transferring elements which have been produced by process
to their ultimate destination.
Hutahaean (2015:3) reveals that system is said to be a good system if
possessing several following traits such as:
1. Components
The system consists of a number of interacting components which work
together to form a unity. Components of the system can be either a
11
12
subsystem or parts of the system. Each subsystem has its own
properties to perform certain functions affecting the whole system.
2. Boundary
Boundary is an area which limits between a system with other systems
or with its external environment. Boundary allows the system to be
recognized as a unity and shows scope of the system.
3. Environment
The external environment of the system includes anything beyond the
limits of the system, which affect the operation system. A conducive
environment must be created and maintained as it becomes the energy
of the system. Whereas, the adverse external environment must be
controlled as it may interfere with the continuity of the system.
4. Interface
Interface is a liaison between one subsystem with other subsystems,
allowing resources to flow from subsystems to other subsystems.
5. Input
Input is the energy put into the system.
6. Output
The results of processed energy are classified into useful output and
residual disposal. Output can also be an input to other subsystems.
7. System Processor
A system becomes a processor that will convert input into output.
8. System Target
13
A system has objective, goal or target. The goal of the system
determines the required input and the output to be generated.
Romney and Steinbart (2015:30) state that a system has a close
relationship with data and information. Data are facts which are collected,
recorded, stored and processed by an information system. Information is
data which have been organized and processed to provide meaning and
improve the decision-making process. On the other hand, according to Hall
(2011:11), information is simply defined as a processed data. From the
definitions which had been mentioned, it can be concluded that information
is the result of processed data that will be used as the basis and indicators in
decision making. Accordingly, the existence of a good system is expected to
produce a high-quality and useful information.
In addition, Romney and Steinbart (2015:30) also present the
characteristics of useful information, which must be:
1. Relevant
Information can reduce uncertainty and improve decision making or can
confirm and correct prior expectations.
2. Reliable
Information is free from error and bias as well as it accurately
represents organization of events or activities.
3. Complete
Information does not omit important aspects of the measured events or
activities.
14
4. Timely
Information is provided in time for decision makers to make decisions.
5. Understandable
Information is presented in a useful and intelligible format.
6. Verifiable
It is expected that two independent and knowledgeable people produce
the same information.
7. Accessible
Information is available to users when they need it and in a format they
can use.
In the enterprise, information systems are crucially considered as
information provides the basis of decision-making. An information system
includes any organized combination of people, hardware, software,
communications networks, data resources, policies and procedures that
stores, retrieves, transforms, and disseminates information in an
organization (O‟Brien & Markas, 2011:4). Hall (2011:7) also defines
information systems as a set of formal procedures by which data are
collected, processed into information and distributed to users. Thus,
information system accepts inputs, which are converted through various
processes into outputs aiming to generate useful information that goes to
users for decision making.

15
2.1.2. Accounting Information Systems
Accounting information system is a system which collects, records,
stores and processes accounting and other data to produce information for
decision makers (Romney & Steinbart, 2015:36).
Furthermore, Hall (2011:7) states that accounting information system
subsystems process financial transactions and non-financial transactions
which directly affect the processing of financial transactions and non-
financial transactions. Financial transaction is an economic event which
affects the assets and equities of the organization, reflected in its accounts
and measured in monetary terms. Whereas, the nonfinancial transactions are
events which do not meet the narrow definition of a financial transaction.
From the definitions above, it is apparent that accounting information
system includes a system which changes data from both financial
transactions as well as non-financial transactions and becomes useful
information for all decision makers or users.
According to Romney and Steinbart (2015:36), there are six
components of accounting information systems, which include:
1. The people who use the system
2. The procedures and instructions who collect, process and store data
3. The data about the organization and its business activities
4. The software used to process the data
5. The information technology infrastructure, including the computers,
peripheral devices, and network communications devices used in
accounting information system

16
6. The internal controls and security measures safeguarding accounting
information system data
These six components enable an accounting information system to
fulfill three important business functions, such as:
1. Collecting and storing data about organizational activities, sources and
personnel.
2. Transforming data into information to be planned, executed, controlled
and evaluated by management including activities, resources, and
personnel.
3. Providing adequate controls to safeguard the organization‟s assets and
data.
A well-designed accounting information system can add value to an
organization by:
1. Improving the quality and reducing the costs of products and services
An accounting information system can monitor machinery to be
immediately notified by operators when performance falls outside
acceptable quality limits.
2. Improving efficiency
Timely information enables such a just-in-time manufacturing approach
to be possible, as it requires constant, accurate, and up-to-date
information about raw materials, inventories and their locations.
3. Sharing knowledge
Sharing knowledge and expertise can improve operations and provide
competitive advantage. For example, CPA firms use their information

17
systems to share best practices and to support communication between
offices.
4. Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of its supply chain
This will allow customers to directly access inventory; and sales order
entry systems can reduce sales marketing costs, thereby increasing
customer retention rates.
5. Improving the internal control structure
An accounting information system with the proper internal control
structure can help protect systems from frauds, errors, system failures
and disasters.
6. Improving decision making
Accounting information system can help improve decision-making as it
can reduce uncertainty and provide a basis for choosing among
alternative actions and it can store information about the results of
previous decisions as well as properly provide accurate information.
There are also five major cycles in the accounting information system,
which are:
1. The revenue cycle, where goods and services are sold for cash or a
future promise to receive cash.
2. The expenditure cycle, where companies purchase inventory for resale
activity or raw materials to produce products in exchange for cash or a
future promise to pay cash.
3. The production or conversion cycle, where raw materials are
transformed into finished goods.

18
4. The human resources/payroll cycle, where employees are hired, trained,
compensated, evaluated, promoted, and terminated.
5. The financing cycle, where companies sell shares in the company to
investors and borrow money, and where investors are paid dividends
and interest in the form of loans.
2.2. Electronic Money (e-money)
2.2.1. Electronic Money (e-money)
Electronic money is a stored value product or prepared card in which
the amount of money is in an electronic card or called as an electronic
equipment (BIS,1996). According to the regulation of Bank Indonesia
Number 16/8/PBI/2014 concerning to the amendment of the regulation of
Bank Indonesia Number 11/12/PBI/2009 about Electronic Money (e-
money), explaining that electronic money is a payment system which has
elements published based on the value of money paid in advance to the
publisher and the value of money stored electronically on a media server or
chip. According to Rizki et al. (2000), electronic money is a cash payment
instrument in which nominal value is stored on a prepaid card chip, and
offline transactions, which does not need a direct relationship between the
bank and the user, and electronic money is not a user‟s deposit.
According to the regulation of Bank Indonesia Number
11/12/PBI/2009, electronic money has elements, consisting of:

19
1. Issued based on the value paid by the customer before the issuer.
2. The value of money stored electronically in a media such as server or
chip.
3. A payment tool to traders who are not included as issuers of electronic
money.
4. The value of electronic money paid by holders and managed by the
issuer are not defined as deposit.
In addition, Siti et al. (2006) states that electronic money has many
advantages compared with cash and the other non-cash payment tools, such
as:
1. Transaction using e-money tends to be faster and more convenient
because users do not need to bring money or take the change after doing
“buying-selling” process.
2. It prevents errors in the calculation of change.
3. Time needed in the payment process using e-money is much shorter
compared to credit card, ATM, and debit cards because the users do not
need to input their PIN code or password in e-money card.
4. The value of money or balance can be topped up through the facilities
provided by issuers or banks.

20
2.2.2. Mobile Wallet (m-wallet)
According to Sharma et al. (2018), mobile wallet is the latest mode of
m-commerce which allows users to make transactions, online shopping,
bookings and to share the available services. A user needs to have a mobile
device or any device compatible with mobile communication networks, to
conduct mobile payments (Au and Kauffman, 2008). Mobile wallet could
also be understood as the second revolution followed by e-wallet concepts.
In this sense, organizations in developed nations, such as in Japan, enable
both the mobile and electronic options for users to complete their payment
(Amoroso and Magnier-Watanabe, 2012). In addition, mobile wallet has
become the current buzzword in the telecom industry, due to a rapid
increase in the information and communication technology showing
exponential increase in mobile phone users (Au and Kauffman, 2008). In
general, secure mobile wallet involves four functions, such as:
1. Generation of user identify and verification for authenticity
2. Various options for making financial transactions
3. Provision of for making m-commerce transactions
4. Security provisions
2.3. OVO
2.3.1. Definition
a. “OVO Application” is a downloadable application regulated with
Terms and Conditions, which are currently known by the brand, name,
21
logo and/or sign known as “OVO” or brand, name, logos and/or other
marks.
b. “Account” or “Your Account” means a specific identification made in
OVO based on customer registration request.
c. “Data” means any data and/or information in any form, from time to
time (including when the Application is downloaded) to be submitted
to Us / the Service Provider or through Application.
d. “Us” means PT. Visionet Internasional (VI).
e. “Services” mean any existing services, programs, services, products,
features, systems, facilities and/or services provided and/or offered in
or through the Application.
f. “Customer Service (OVO Call Center)” is the function of the
customer service center for customers who can be contacted via
telephone calls and/or email.
g. “OVO” is an electronic system (platform) created by PT. Visionet
Internasional (VI).
h. “OVO Users” are users of OVO Applications and Cards (HiCard and
Sub Card Reward-OVO Cards).
i. “Terms and Conditions” means these Terms and Conditions and any
changes, additions, changes, adjustments and/or modifications made
from time to time.
j. “Transaction” means all transactions, activities, and/or actions carried
out in or through the Application, Account and/or Security Code

22
including the use of the Service or certain features in the Service or
Application.
k. “VI” is PT. Visionet Internasional, a limited liability company
established under the laws of the Republic of Indonesia.
2.3.2. Brief Guide
a. The OVO Application is a software application where all the instructions
come from a mobile application or online.
b. The OVO Application can be operated via Android phones (OS 4.2 and
above) and also iPhone (iOS 8.0 and above) through the Google Play Store
or Apple Store.
c. The users will be asked to authorize instructions by using different types
of security information (eg. Security Code, user name, password) if
needed.
d. After authorizing, OVO will carry out the instructions according to the
customers/ users orders, to ensure that security information with other
parties is secretly saved and maintained.
e. OVO ensures that the confidentiality and security of the provided personal
information is well maintained and the users data will be utilized in
accordance with applicable regulations.
f. The users may ask or enter Us through the OVO User Service Contact
Center (1 500 696).

23
The OVO Application offers 2 (two) types of customer classification
with different types of OVO service features. These customer
classifications are:
A. OVO Club
OVO Club is a classification of OVO membership that allows the
customers/users to enjoy the facilities of electronic money
(unregistered) and OVO Points. For OVO Club, the maximum balance
of OVO Cash is IDR 2,000,000 (two million Rupiahs). If the users
want to get more services from OVO, they can upgrade their OVO
Club into OVO Premier, with more diversed OVO service features.
B. OVO Premier
OVO Premier is a classification of OVO membership that allows the
users to enjoy “registered” electronic money, OVO Points, Budgeting
service features, and other added service features from time to time.
For OVO Premier, the maximum balance of OVO Cash is IDR
10.000.000.
2.3.3. Product of OVO Club and OVO Premier
2.3.3.1. OVO POINTS
a. OVO Points is a customer loyalty program aimed for
customers/users as well as all OVO merchant partner customers or
OVO partners.
b. OVO Points will be given every time the users shop or buy products
in all partner merchants or OVO partners.

24
c. The users can also redeem OVO Points which they collect (redeem
points) with a number of attractive offers of goods, products, and
discounts on each partner merchant and OVO partner.
d. Any OVO Points that the users get, cannot be transferred to other
OVO Users.
e. The amount of OVO Points given will vary from partner merchant
or OVO partner.
f. The points that the users receive will be valid for a period of 18
(eighteen) months from the receipt of points; if the period is
exceeded, the Points will be forfeited.
g. OVO Points can also be used to make payment transactions instead
of OVO Cash.
2.3.3.2. OVO CASH
a. OVO CASH is an electronic money balance that can be used for a
variety of payment transactions.
b. Customers can top up (or add) available balances.
2.3.4. Loyalty Program Cooperation
As a platform, OVO gives a loyalty program collaboration with
Hypermart and Matahari Department Store (in form of card), including:
a. OVO-HiCard Collaboration
b. Matahari Rewards-OVO Cooperation
Both cards are Loyalty Program membership cards between Us / OVO
and PT Matahari Department Store Tbk.] for Matahari Rewards-OVO Cards
and for OVO-HiCard.

25
OVO-Matahari Reward Card has two types of membership, namely
Red and Diamond, which are subject to the Matahari Rewards and OVO
membership Terms and Conditions.
The users can show their OVO-Matahari Reward Card or OVO-
HiCard when making payment transactions at outlets or at various partner
merchants or OVO partners.
In every transaction, the users will obtain OVO Points, which can be
exchanged for Matahari Department Store, Hypermart products and all
partner merchants or OVO partners, all over Indonesia who put the “OVO
Zone” sign.
2.4. UTAUT (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology)
Hoehle et al. (2012) shows the need to use more current models, and
UTAUT becomes a suitable option (Venkatesh et al. 2003). UTAUT uses
multiple models of user acceptance theory, and it offers the most available
comprehensive model at the moment. The UTAUT not only does
underscore the main determinants predicting the intention to adopt and
actual adoption, but it does also allow the researcher to analyze the
contingencies from moderator that would amplify or constrain the effects of
core determinants (A. Jorge, P. Begona & R. Maria Angeles, 2015).
UTAUT has been empirically tested and proven superior to other prevailing
competing models (Venkatesh et al. 2003; Venkatesh and Zhang 2010).
UTAUT is a model which explains more about individual acceptance and
use of information technology. Based on Venkatesh et al. (2003), UTAUT

26
was developed through a review and consolidation of the constructs of eight
models by which the previous research had done to explain information
system usage behavior, such as: Theory of Reasoned Action
(TRA), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Motivational
Model, Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), a combined Theory of Planned
Behavior and Technology Acceptance Model (combined TPB and TAM),
Model of Personal Computer (PC) Utilization, Innovation Diffusion Theory
(IDT), and Social Cognitive Theory (SCT). Figure 2.1 presents the
construction of UTAUT based on the combined 8 theories.
Figure 2.1
The Four Core Determinants of UTAUT
Source: Wu et al., (2008); Venkatesh et al. (2003)
2.5. UTAUT2 (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology2)
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT 2)
are developed models of Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of

27
Technology (UTAUT). UTAUT was firstly introduced by Venkatesh et al.
in 2003 to explain user intentions to use an information system and
subsequent usage behavior within organizational context. The latest model
is UTAUT 2 as proposed by Venkatesh et al. in 2012 mentioning several
factors to study acceptance and use of technology in a consumer context.
At first, UTAUT consists of only four constructs, consisting of:
performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating
conditions. Furthermore, UTAUT 2 incorporates three constructs into
UTAUT covering: hedonic motivation, price value, and habit. Altogether,
UTAUT 2 has several elements such as: performance expectancy, effort
expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation,
price value and habit as the factors. Individual differences such as, age,
gender, and experience are also hypothesized to moderate the effects of
these constructs on behavioral intention and technology used in UTAUT 2.
According to Venkatesh et al. (2012), compared to UTAUT, the
extensions proposed in UTAUT2 produce a substantial improvement in the
variance as explained in behavioral intention (56 to 74 percent) and in
technology application (40 to 52 percent). In this paper, the researcher took
some of the variables from UTAUT 2 consisting of social influence,
facilitating conditions and price value to determine behavioral intention to
use mobile banking.
The model of UTAUT 2 described by Venkatesh et al. (2012) is
illustrated in the following figure:

28
Figure 2.2
UTAUT 2 Model
Source: Venkatesh et al. (2012, p. 160)
2.6. Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses Development
This research refers and merges the two previous empirical
researches of Alalwan et al. (2018) that conducted a research based on
UTAUT 2 theory, by utilizing performance expectancy, effort expectancy,
social influence, facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation, price value,
habit and perceived risk as the factors to examine the factors influencing
Jordanian customers‟ intentions and adoption of internet banking. Chopdar
et al. (2018) also conducted a research based on UTAUT2 theory, by using
performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating

29
conditions, hedonic motivation, price value, habit, and also extended by
adding perceived risk and security risk as an external factors to examine
mobile shopping apps adoption and perceived risks a cross-country
perspective.
The research model on this research is presented by Figure 2.3.
Figure 2.3.
Research Framework
Performance
expectancy
Effort
Expectancy
Social
Influence
Behavioral OVO Use

Intention Behavior
Price
Value
Hedonic
Motivation
Habit
30
Thus, in this research, the researcher intends to figure out empirical
evidence and to examine the effect of performance expectancy, effort
expectancy, social influence, price value, hedonic motivation, and habit on
the customer use behavior to use OVO at Brawijaya University, Malang,
Indonesia.
2.6.1. The Effect of Performance Expectancy on Individual’s Behavioral
Intention to Use OVO
Performance Expectancy (PE) in communication technology implies
that users consider OVO as one of beneficial mobile wallets which enable
them to accomplish their goal-oriented tasks (Venkatesh et al., 2003).
From a measurement point of view, PE extends the concept of perceived
usefulness (PU) from the original specification of the Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM). Adapting PE to the context of OVO considers
how the users might perceive the benefits from the platform to perform
their transactions.
In this perception, if the customers believe that using OVO as their
mobile wallet is useful and would enhance their transactions, then they
will use it. Similarly, if they feel that using OVO is useless and not helping
their transaction, then they consequently will not use it.
In the TAM context involving transactions, perceived usefulness (PU),
was a significant antecedent of m-shopping intention (Aldas-Manzano,
Lassala-Navarre, Ruiz-Mafe, & Sanz-Blas, 2009) and was the usage

31
intention towards mobile financial services (Y.-K. Lee, Park, Chung, &
Blakeney, 2012).
Many information system researchers have empirically validated the
positive influence of Performance Expectancy on behavioral intention of
using information systems. A research by Alalwan et al. (2018) explains
that performance expectancy is significantly influencing Jordanian
customers‟ intentions and adoption of internet banking. Chopdar et al.
(2018) also founds that performance expectancy has a significant effect on
behavioral intention to adopt mobile shopping apps in India and US. In
various cultural contexts, Performance Expectancy has been found to
exhibit a significant positive relationship with the Behavioral Intention to
adopt m-commerce (Chong, 2013; Lai & Lai, 2014). In a study in China, Lu
and Yu-Jen Su (2009) observed that Performance Expectancy significantly
influenced individual mobile service utilization.
However, the contrast result of the research undertaken by Akturan &
Tezcan (2012) stated there is no direct relationship between perceived
usefulness and behavioral intention to use mobile banking in youth market.
Based on some studies mentioned, the researcher intends to examine
the influence of Performance Expectancy towards OVO‟s customers Use
Behavior. To that end, the researcher formulates the alternative hypothesis
as follows:
H1: Performance Expectancy has a positive influence on Behavioral
Intention to use OVO.

32
2.6.2. The Effect of Effort Expectancy on Individual’s Behavioral Intention to
Use OVO
Effort Expectancy (EE) is described as “the degree of ease associated
with consumers‟ use of technology” (Venkatesh et al., 2012, p.159). It is
measured by extending the perceived ease of use (PEOU) from the
Technology Acceptance Model with items capturing usage complexity and
general ease of use.
In this perception, if a user believes that OVO is easy to use, then they
will want to use it. However, if user believes that OVO is difficult to use,
they will not want to use the technology. The easier to use the technology,
more useful it is perceived to be likely accepted by its users (Bashir &
Madhavaiah, 2015).
Many past studies have confirmed the positive impacts of PEOU on
the adoption of m-commerce (Khalifa & Ning Shen, 2008; Tsu Wei,
Marthandan, Yee-Loong Chong, Ooi & Arumugam, 2009). Perceived ease
of use (PEOU) is vital in the early stages of adoption of new technology and
is empirically shown to have a significant influence on the intention to use
mobile payments (S.C. Kim et al., 2014). However, the contrast result of the
research undertaken by Wua & Wang (2005) stated that the perceived ease
of use did not significantly affect user‟s behavioral intention in mobile
commerce acceptance. Al-Jabri (2015) also finds that perceived ease of use
does not have significant effect on intention to use mobile banking in Saudi
Arabia.
33
A research by Alalwan et al. (2018) explains that Effort Expectancy is
significantly influencing Jordanian customers‟ intentions and adoption of
internet banking. Chopdar et al. (2018) also discovers that Effort
Expectancy has a significant effect on behavioral intention to adopt mobile
shopping apps in India and US. In the same line, Effort Expectancy has been
found to have a significant positive relationship with Behavioral Intention to
use mobile apps (Hew et al., 2015). In a study on user acceptance of mobile
internet services, Effort Expectancy (EE) is shown to have a significant
effect on behavioral intention to use (Wang & Wang, 2010).
Based on some studies as mentioned above, the researcher determines
to examine the influence of Effort Expectancy towards OVO‟s customers
Behavioral Intention. To that end, the researcher formulates the alternative
hypothesis as follows:
H2: Effort Expectancy has a positive influence on Behavioral Intention
to use OVO.
2.6.3. The Effect of Social Influence on Individual’s Behavioral Intention to
Use OVO
Social influence is one of the variables of Unified Theory of
Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT 2). Social influence is the
extent to which consumers perceive that their surrounding social
environment (e.g., family and friends) believe they should use a particular
technology (Venkatesh et al., 2003). It is the notion that individual behavior
is influenced by the way of peers or family opinion to value the use of

34
mobile banking (Oliveira et al., 2014). Thus, social pressure coming from
external environment can affect customer perceptions and behaviors of
engaging in mobile banking services (Tarhini et al., 2016).
In another study in China, Yang et al. (2012) observes a positive
effect of Social Influence on adoption intention of mobile payment service.
Social Influence (SI) is found to be significantly and positively correlated to
the intention to use m-commerce in a study conducted in Malaysia (Tsu Wei
et al., 2009). Other similar results that confirmed the positive influence of
social influence on behavioral intention to use information technology are
obtained by Martins et al. (2014); Abrahãoa et al. (2016); Tarhini et al.
(2016).
On the other hand, research by Alalwan et al. (2018) explains that
Social Influence has no effect towards Jordanian customers‟ intentions and
adoption of internet banking. Similarly, Chopdar et al. (2018) also finds that
Social Influence has no significant effect on behavioral intention to adopt
mobile shopping apps in India and US.
However, the result of the research is not the same as the research
undertaken by Oliveira et al. (2014) stating that social influence has no
significant effect on behavioral intention to use mobile banking in Portugal.
Alalwan et al. (2017) also finds that social influence is not able to account
any statistical variance in the behavioral intention to adopt mobile banking
on Jordanian bank customers.

35
to examine the influence of Social Influence towards OVO‟s customers
H3: Social Influence has a positive influence on Behavioral Intention to
use OVO.
2.6.4. The Effect of Price Value on Individual’s Behavior Intention to Use
OVO
Price value becomes one of the variables of Unified Theory of
Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT 2). Price value is the
consumer‟s trade-off between the perceived benefits of using OVO and the
monetary cost of using it, whereas using OVO needs data service carrier
cost (mobile internet) and device cost.
Price value will have a positive impact on behavioral intention if
customers perceive that benefits of using OVO are greater than the incurred
costs.
A research using UTAUT 2 and trust conducted by Alalwan et al.
(2017) proves that price value is significantly and positively influencing
behavioral intention in using mobile banking by Jordanian bank customers.
In addition, a research conducted by Arenas-Gaitán et al. (2015) also shows
that elderly‟s people‟s to accept Internet banking is significantly impacted
by price value.
36
A research by Alalwan et al. (2018) explained that Price Value
significantly affected Jordanian customers‟ intentions and adoption of
internet banking. Similarly, Chopdar et al. (2018) also finds that Price Value
also has significant effect on behavioral intention to adopt mobile shopping
apps in India and US.
In contrast, a research by Baptista & Oliveira (2015) that combines
the extended unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT2)
with the cultural moderators only shows performance expectancy, hedonic
motivation, and habit which are found to be the most significant antecedents
of behavioral intention to use mobile banking. The result of the research
fails to show price value as the significant factor regarding to the behavioral
intention to use mobile banking in Mozambique, Southeast Africa. Studies
conducted by Koenig-Lewis et al. (2010) and Yang et al. (2012) also state
that price value does not give any significant effect on the behavioral
intention to use mobile banking.
Based on some studies as mentioned above, the researcher intends to
examine the influence of Price Value towards OVO‟s customers Behavioral
Intention. To that end, the researcher formulates the alternative hypothesis
as follows:
H4: Price Value has a positive influence on Behavioral Intention to use
OVO.
37
2.6.5. The Effect of Hedonic Motivation on Individual’s Behavioral Intention
to Use OVO
Babin, Darden, and Griffin (1994) suggested that Consumer‟s online
shopping considers two types of motivations: Hedonic and utilitarian.
Hedonic Motivation (HM) is conceptualised as the feeling of cheerfulness,
joy or enjoyment, stimulated by applying technology. In technology
acceptance research, hedonic motivation is conceptualized as perceived
enjoyment (Venkatesh et al., 2012). More thorough analysis of relevant
literature in customer behaviour as well as technology acceptance streams
are revealed by Venkatesh et al. (2012) finding out that several factors such
as playfulness, joy, and enjoyment to capture the hedonic motivation are
significant determinants of customer acceptance of technology (Childers et
al., 2012). Interestingly, using online banking channels could be perceived
as being part of a modern lifestyle, adding further value to the segment of
customers who look for novelty and modernism (Celik, 2008; Gan et al.,
2006; Riffai et al., 2012). In addition, customers who perceive that using
the technology might comprise fun, playfulness, and enjoyment are more
likely to perceive this technology in a more productive manner requiring
less effort, and hence will contribute to value the system (e.g. performance
expectancy, price value).
Hedonic information systems, aiming to provide self-fulfilling rather
than instrumental value to the user, are strongly connected to home and
leisure activities, focusing on the fun-aspect of using information system,
and encouraging productively prolonged use (Van der Heijden, 2004).

38
A research by Alalwan et al. (2018) explains that Hedonic Motivation
significantly affects Jordanian customers‟ intentions and adoption of
internet banking. Similarly, Chopdar et al. (2018) also finds that Hedonic
Motivation also has significant effect on behavioral intention to adopt
mobile shopping apps in India and US. Therefore, if hedonic motivation of
using IB is high, the overall benefits as perceived by using this technology
will increase, and accordingly will contribute to both the performance
expectancy and the price value of using IB (Dodds et al., 1991; Venkatesh
et al., 2012).
examine the influence of Price Value towards OVO‟s customers Behavioral
Intention. To that end, the researcher formulates the alternative hypothesis
as follows:
H5: Hedonic Motivation has a positive influence on Behavioral
Intention to use OVO.
2.6.6. The Effect of Habit on Individual’s Behavioral Intention to Use OVO
Habit (H) has been defined as the extent to which people tend to
perform actions automatically because of learning (Limayem, Hirt, &
Cheung, 2007). In that context, Habit or Habitual use reflects the multiple
results of past experiences (Venkatesh et al., 2012) and the regularity of
past behavior which is considered to be one of the principal determinants
of present behavior (Ajzen, 2002). Several studies have examined habitual

39
use in a cross-national context. Baptista and Olivera (2015) in a study of
mobile banking in Mozambique reported that habit is found to influence
behavioral intention significantly, and it is identified as the most important
antecedent of use behavior. In another study conducted in Malaysia, Hew
et al. (2015) find habit to be the strongest predictor of behavioral intention
to use mobile apps. Kim (2012) suggests that habit significantly influences
the actual usage of mobile data services and applications.
A research by Alalwan et al. (2018) explains that Habit significantly
affects Jordanian customers‟ intentions and adoption of internet banking.
Similarly, Chopdar et al. (2018) also finds that Habit also had significant
effect on behavioral intention to adopt mobile shopping apps in India and
US.
examine the influence of Price Value towards OVO‟s customers
H6: Habit has a positive influence on Behavioral Intention to use
OVO.
2.6.7. The Effect of Behavioral Intention on OVO Customer’s Use Behavior
Use Behavior (UB) as a construct has been treated in the literature as
the main construct describing the determinants of computer use behavior as
a special case (Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989). Use Behavior is not
40
explicitly defined in UTAUT2, and in the original specification, it is
measured through the items available in the system register (Venkatesh et
al., 2003).
The main antecedent of UB in the UTAUT model is framed as the
Behavioral Intention and has a single direct effect on individual‟s actual use
of a given technology. This construct is derived from the theory of
Reasoned Action and is defined as a measure of the strength of one‟s
intention to perform a specified behavior (Davis et al., 1989, p. 984).
Several studies in the past have confirmed the powerful correlation between
intention to perform a behavior and actual behavior (Dabholkar & Bagozzi,
2002; Lucas & Spitler, 1999; Vijayasarathy, 2004). Gro (2015) in an
empirical study, suggested that consumers‟ m-shopping behavior was
significantly determined by their behavioral intention to use m-shopping
which confirmed previous empirical findings (Aldas-Manzano et al., 2009;
Yu, 2012).
A research by Chopdar et al. (2018) also finds that Behavioral
Intention also has significant effect on Use Behavior to adopt mobile
shopping apps in India and US.
to examine the influence of Behavioral Intention towards OVO‟s customers
Use Behavior. To that end, the researcher formulates the alternative
41
H7: Behavioral Intention has a positive influence on OVO Customer’s
Use Behavior.
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD
3.1. Research Design
This research applies a casual study with quantitative method to
provide valuable insight to the ordering of reality and the materialized
discourses, It is a type of research that explains phenomena by collecting
numerical data which are analyzed by using mathematical or statistical
based methods (Creswell, 2014). Furthermore, such method can mitigate
personal bias; yet, it does not provide in-depth understanding of the
analyzed items due to the inherently reductive nature of classification
(Savela, 2017).
Research design that researcher used in this research is explanatory
research as an understanding to clearly define each investigated variable in
some situations. To add, the purpose of this explanatory study is to provide
to researcher a history and to illustrate a relevant aspect with phenomena of
an object. According to Malhotra (2010), explanatory research is
acknowledged as one kind of research with the main goal to present insight
and understanding of the research problem situation.
3.2. Population and Sample
According to Bougie and Sekaran ( 2013, p.240), population refers to
entire group of people, events, or things of interest that the researcher
wishes to investigate; and sample is a subset of the population. The
population in this study includes the student of faculty of economics and
42
43
business in Brawijaya University, Malang. The researcher prefers university
students as the population due to their technology understanding and
frequent interaction with online transaction by using internet and
smartphones (Tarhini et al., 2016; Malaquias & Hwang, 2016). Hence, the
researcher intends to measure the interest as well as the intention of
university students to use OVO in their daily life.
Malang is ranked the second most populous city in East Java after
Surabaya, reaching 895.387 residents living in the city (Wikipedia, 2017).
The large number of residents in Malang provides a good market for PT.
Visionet Internasional to promote OVO and its other products. Furthermore,
researcher prefers Malang as a place to do the research due to consideration
of location adjacent to the researcher‟s as well as the limitations of time and
expense.
Generally, there are two types of research sampling, which are:
probability sampling and nonprobability sampling (Sekaran and Bougie,
2013, p.245). A probability sampling or random sampling is a sample in
which each element within the population has an equal, or at least a known,
probability of being selected within the sample. On the other hand, in non-
probability sampling or non-random sampling, the samples are
unrecognized and have predetermined probability to be chosen as subjects,
meaning all the individuals in the population are not given equal chances.
A sample is chosen from a population in order to make appropriate
general conclusions (Barreio & Albandoz, 2001). Sampling in this research
was conducted by using non-probability sampling in convenience sampling

44
method. Convenience sampling in this research refers to the collection of
information from members of the population who are conveniently available
(Sekaran & Bougie, 2013, p. 252). It also means that taking samples that
match the requirements of samples from a particular population becomes the
easiest effort to reach or obtain. Since the actual sampling frame is
unknown, convenience sampling is chosen to carry out the survey (Leong et
al., 2013a). Convenience sampling is a more practical rather than a true
random or stratified random sample (Weir & Jones, 2008). Convenience
sampling is one type of non-probability sampling that prioritizes aspects of
ease and efficiency of sampling. Thus, the sample of this research is the
member of research population consisting of any undergraduate student in
Faculty of Economics and Business, Brawijaya University, ever using OVO.
Sample size may reflect the population that is very important in this
research to generalize the research results. The method used in this research
is applied to determine the sample size of a population is Slovin method.
Upon determining the amount of Slovin sample, the researcher use 5% error
rate from the list considered as representative sampling. The smaller the
error tolerance, the more accurate the sample describes the population.
The formula of Sovin method is depicted as follows:
Or
Description:
n = Sample size
45
N = Population
e = Error sampling
The total population of the whole undergraduate accounting students in
Faculty of Economics and Business, at Brawijaya University, either on the
regular program or international programs in 2018 consisting of 1.330
students. The following formula presents the computation of the sample size
based on Slovin method.
1,237 / [1 + 1,237 (0.05)2] = 1,237/ [1 + 1,237 (0.0025) = 1,237 / [1 + 3.0925]
= 1,237 / 4.0925
= 302 students
Thus, in this research, the minimum sample size is 302 students.
Afterwards, the researcher decides to spread 400 questionnaires to reach the
samples within the range.
3.3. Research Data and Sources
3.3.1. Sources of Data
Whereas, quantitative research method is defined as an approach for
testing objectives theories by examining the relationship among variables
(Creswell, 2014). The research emphasis on testing theories through
measurements where the relationship between variables of the research
aims to test hypotheses (hypothesis testing).
The variables of this research consist of three variables, including the
independent, mediating and dependent variable.

46
The collection of data for this research will be conducted through
structured questionnaires. A questionnaire is a pre-formulated written set
of questions to which respondents record their answer within closely
defined alternatives (Sekaran & Bougie, 2013, p.147).
By directly distributing questionnaire to the respondents, types of data
that are gathered in this research are considered as primary data. Based on
Bougie and Sekaran (2013, p.113), primary data refers to information that
the researcher gathers first on the variables of interest for the specific
purpose of the research through instruments. This research utilizes self-
administered questionnaires to reduce biasing error due to the
interviewers‟ characteristics and skills (Phellas, Bloch & Seale, 2011).
3.3.2. Data Collection Method
. Data collection is a procedure that needs to be accomplished to
obtain data in the research. The data collection method used in this
research is survey method by providing questions to the respondents
(Sekaran & Bougie, 2013, p. 102). This method requires a contact between
the researcher and the subject (respondents) of the research to obtain the
necessary data. The data collection tool or survey instrument used in this
research is questionnaire, consisting of a set of prepared questions to
gather information from individuals with close-ended type of questions
(Kothari, 2004). Providing questionnaires is beneficial to cover a large
sample at a modest cost and representative of its population (Akbayrak,
2000).
The primary data are obtained by distributing questionnaires, which

47
are generally designed to obtain large number of quantitative data. The
researcher collects information from respondents through the manual and
online distribution..
Question items as listed in the questionnaire in this research are
mostly based on the research questions of Venkatesh et al. (2012), Alawan
et al. (2016) and Alawan et al. (2017) studies. The research questions in
those studies are in English, conducted by applying several steps in the
adoption of the questions.
3.4. Definition, Indicators, and Variables Measures Research
A variable includes anything that can take on differing or varying
values (Sekaran and Bougie, p.68) at various times for the same object or
person, or at the same time for different objects or person. It also can be
defined as any aspect of a theory that can vary or change as part of the
interaction within the theory.
There are nine variables in this research, including: Performance
Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, Social Influence, Facilitating Conditions,
Price Value, Hedonic Motivation, Habit, Behavioral Intention, and Using
OVO. The following descriptions will explain more about the constructs and
indicators.
3.4.1. Performance Expectancy
Performance Expectancy is conceptualized “as the degree to which an
individual believes that applying the technology will help him or her to
attain job performance” (Venkatesh et al., 2012). Similar to TAM‟s

48
perceived usefulness, it is the perception of individuals that using the
system will improve their performance from using the technology in
performing activities. This research utilizes Performance Expectancy as a
variable based on the concept by Venkatesh et al (2012) and Chopdar et al.
(2018) with the following indicators, such as:
a. Providing usefulness
b. Enhancing the chance to achieve important tasks
c. Improving productivity
Based on those measurement indicators, then the statements in the
questionnaire are stated as follows:
a. I find OVO is useful in my daily life
b. Using OVO increases my productivity
c. Using OVO increases my chances of achieving tasks that are
important to me
3.4.2. Effort Expectancy
Venkatesh et al. (2003, 2012) defined Effort Expectancy as “the
extent of ease connected with the use of a system. In line with Davis et al.
(1989), the individual‟s intention to accept a new system is not only
predicted by how much the system is positively valued but also by how
using this system is not difficult and requires free efforts. This research
applies Effort Expectancy as a variable based on the concept by Chopdar
et al. (2018) with the following indicators, such as:
a. Easy to learn
49
b. Clear and understandable
c. Easy to use
d. Easy to become skillful
Based on those measurement indicators above, then the statements in
the questionnaire are stated as follows:
a. My interaction with OVO is clear and understandable
b. It is easy for me to become skillful at using OVO
c. I find OVO easy to use
d. Learning how to use OVO is easy for me
3.4.3. Social Influence
According to the UTAUT model, social influence is characterised as
„the extent to which an individual perceives that it is important to apply the
new system‟ (Venkatesh et al., 2003). The selection of social influence as
a key determinant of the behavioral intention is built on prior literature
which supports the impacting role of social influence on customers‟
propensity to use a new technology (Alalwan, Dwivedi & Williams, 2016;
Zhou et al., 2010). This research employs Social Influence as a variable
based on the concept by Chopdar et al. (2018) with the following
indicators, such as:
a. Opinion from other people
b. Influence from other people
c. Preference to use OVO

50
a. People who are important to me think that I should use OVO
b. People who influence my behavior think that I should use OVO
c. People whose opinions that I value prefer that I use OVO
3.4.4. Price Value
In comparison with organizational sitting, using technology over the
customers context could carry customers to further financial cost (Alalwan
et al, 2017). Therefore, customers could cognitively compare the utilities
comprised in using new systems with the financial cost that should be paid
for using such systems (Venkatesh et al., 2012). Whereas, Venkatesh et al.
(2012) defined Price Value as a tradeoff between the perceived benefits of
the applications and the monetary costs for using it. This research applies
Price Value as a variable based on the concept by Chopdar et al. (2018)
with the following indicators of:
a. Reasonable price;
b. Good value; and
c. OVO‟s being worth the price.
Based on those measurement indicators, the statements in the
a. OVO is reasonably priced.
b. OVO is good value for the money.
c. At the current price, OVO provides good value.

51
3.4.5. Hedonic Motivation
Basically, Venkatesh et al. (2012) proposed a direct link between
hedonic motivation and customer intention to use technology. This
research applies Hedonic Motivation as a variable based on the concept by
Chopdar et al. (2017) with the following indicators, such as:
a. Joy
b. Fun
c. Entertaining
a. Using OVO is delightful
b. Using OVO is fun
c. Using OVO is very entertaining
d. Using OVO is delightful
3.4.6. Habit
Limayem (2007) stated that habit has been defined as the extent to
which people tend to perform behaviors automatically because of learning
(Venkatesh et al. 2012). This research uses Habit as a variable based on
the concept by Chopdar et al. (2018) with the following indicators:
a. Using OVO becomes a habit
b. Using OVO becomes an addiction
c. Using OVO is a must
d. Using OVO is natural

52
a. Using OVO has become a habit for me.
b. I am addicted to use OVO.
c. I must use OVO.
d. Using OVO has become natural for me.
3.4.7. Behavioral Intention
Behavioral intention is defined as a person‟s intention or a
motivational factor that captures how much effort a person is willing to
dedicate to perform a behavior (Fishbein &Ajzen, 1975; Ajzen 1991). This
research applies Behavioral Intention as a variable based on the concept by
Chopdar et al. (2018) with the following indicators, such as:
a. The intention in using OVO.
b. The effort to use OVO in daily life.
c. The plan to use OVO in the future.
d. The prediction to use OVO in the future.
a. I intend to use OVO in the future.
b. I will always try to use OVO in my daily life.
c. I plan to use OVO in future.
d. I predict I would use OVO in the future.

53
3.4.8. Use Behaviour
The main goal of UTAUT2 is to predict technology acceptance and
use. In this framework, the relation between intention and use behaviour is
crucial to predict the actual use of technology. This research applies Use
Behavior as a variable based on the concept by Chopdar et al. (2018) with
the following indicators, such as:
a. Using OVO in daily life.
b. Using OVO for personal purchase.
c. Using OVO to pay products.
a. In the past 3 months, I have used OVO in order to purchase products I
use OVO to make personal purchases.
b. In the past 3 months, I have used OVO in order to shop for products
from different merchants .
c. In the past 3 months, I have used OVO to make personal purchase.
Measurement means gathering data in the form of numbers to assign
numbers to attributes of objects, a scale is needed (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013,
p. 211).
Measurement applied in the present research is a Likert scale to
examine how strong respondents agree with a statement related to the
variables of interest in the research (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013, p.220). Likert
scale allows the researcher to distinguish consumers in terms of how they

54
differ from one another in their attitude towards the given statement.
To measure the Likert scale, the respondents are presented with the
questions and are required to choose between seven-point scales with the
following anchors, of: 1 = Strongly Disagree (SD), 2 = Disagree (D), 3 =
Rather Disagree (RD), 4 = Neutral (N), 5 = Rather Agree (RA), 6 = Agree
(A) and 7 = Strongly Agree (SA).
The responses over a number of items tapping a particular concept or
variable can be analyzed from item by item to calculate a total or summated
score for each respondent by summing across items.
The following tables summarize the form of the indicators of the
constructions as applied in this research with the code constructions on Table
3.1.
Table 3.1
Construction Indicators
Variable Construction Indicators Code
I fond OVO is useful in my daily life PE1
Performance Expectancy Using OVO increases my productivity PE2

(PE)
Using OVO increases my chances of PE3
achieving tasks that are important to me
My interaction with OVO is clear and EE1

understandable
Effort Expectancy (EE)
It is easy for me to become skillful at using EE2
OVO
55
I find OVO easy to use EE3
Learning how to use OVO is easy for me EE4
People who are important to me think that I SI1

should use OVO
People who influence my behavior think that SI2

Social Influence (SI)
I should use OVO
People whose opinions that I value prefer that SI3

I use OVO
PV1
OVO is reasonably priced
Price Value (PV)

OVO is good value for the money PV2
At the current price, OVO provides good PV3

value
Using OVO is fun HM1
Using OVO is thrilling HM2

Hedonic Motivation
(HM) HM3
Using OVO is very entertaining
Using OVO is delightful HM4
Using OVO has become a habit for me H1
I am addicted to use OVO H2
I must use OVO H3

Habit
Using OVO has become natural for me H4
(H)
I intend to use OVO in the future BI1
Behavioral Intention (BI)

I will always try to use OVO in my daily life BI2
I plan to use OVO in the future BI3

56
I predict I would use OVO in the future BI4
In the past 3 months, I have used OVO in UB1

order to purchase products
Use Behavior
In the past 3 months, I have used OVO in UB2
(UB) order to shop for products from different
merchants
In the past 3 months, I have used OVO to UB3

make personal purchase
3.5. Structural Equation
The hypotheses that have been formulated in this research are tested
by using Partial Least Squares (PLS) as a multivariate statistical technique
that makes comparisons between multiple dependent variables and multiple
independent variables. The PLS approach is advantageous under conditions
of small sample sizes (Reinartz, Haenlein, & Hensler, 2009) as it requires
very few assumptions about the distribution of the variables. PLS can
simultaneously test the measurement model as well as the structural model.
The purpose of the PLS is to predict the effect of variable X on Y and to
explain the theoretical relationships between the two variables (Abdillah &
Hartono, 2015:163).
Form of the structural equation in this research is described as
follows:
Y1 = β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + β6X6 + β7X7 + e
Z1 = β1Y1 + e
Where:
57
X1 = Performance Expectancy
X2 = Effort Expectancy
X3 = Social Influence
X4 = Facilitating Condition
X5 = Price Value
X6 = Hedonic Motivation
X7 = Habit
Y1 = Behavioral Intention
Z1 = Use Behavior
β = Coefficient
e = Error
58
3.6. Model Evaluation
Figure 3.1
The structural model of research
Source: Primary Data (Processed)
This research applies the measurement model of reflective construct
testing, at the level of First Order Construct (FOC), which is a theoretical
relation between latent variables with estimated parameters or indicators. The
model in PLS is evaluated with outer model evaluation (relationship of
construct with indicators) and inner model evaluation (relation between
constructs).
59
3.6.1. Evaluation of Measurement Model (Outer Model)
Evaluation of outer model is utilized as a test of validity and reliability
of the instruments to acquire valid and reliable data (Abdillah & Hartono,
2015:194). The reliability and validity of the measurement model are
firstly assessed by using the recommended procedural remedies, followed
by the structural model assessment and hypotheses testing by using a
bootstrapping approach (Chopdar, 2018).
1. Validity Test
Validity test is led to determine the ability of the instrument to
measure when supposed to be measured (Abdillah & Hartono,
2015:194). The validity construction indicates how well the results
obtained from the use of appropriate measurement theories to define a
construction. A questionnaire is considered valid if the question on the
questionnaire is able to reveal something from what is measured. The
validity test consists of:
a. Convergent Validity
Convergent Validity is the validity that happens when the scores
obtained from two different instruments that measure the same
variables having a high and strong correlation (Abdillah &
Hartono, 2015:195).
b. Discriminant Validity
Discriminant Validity is validity that occurs when two different
instruments that measure two predicted variables not to be
correlated with uncorrelated produce scores (Abdillah & Hartono,

60
2015:195).
2. Reliability Test
Reliability test shows the extent of the measurement without bias (free
error). Reliability test demonstrates the accuracy and consistency of an
instrument in conducting the measurement (Abdillah & Hartono,
2015:196). A questionnaire is considered reliable if one‟s response to
a statement is consistent or stable over time. In PLS, this test can be
conducted by applying two methods, such as:
a. Cronbach‟s Alpha
Cronbach‟s alpha is applied to measure the lower limit value of
reliability of a construction to declare the reliability if the value
should be more than (>) 0.6.
b. Composite Reliability
Composite reliability measures the value of a construction. The
reliability of this method is believed to be better at estimating the
internal consistency of a construction. PLS output applies
composite reliability with the rule of thumbs values, if it is more
than (>) 0.7 to be considered reliable.
The validity and reliability test parameters in the PLS measurement
model are depicted in Table 3.2.

61
Table 3.2
The Validity and Reliability Test Parameters in PLS Measurement Model
Test Parameters Rule of Thumbs Description
Validity Test Loading Factors More than 0,7 Indicators with a loading
Convergent factor between 0.5 - 0.7
should not be removed as
long as the AVE and
Communality values are
still above 0.5.
Average Variance More than 0,5 -

Extracted (AVE)
Validity Test AVE square and AVE square > -
Discriminant correlation latent correlation latent
construction construction
Cross Loading More than 0,7 in -
the individual
variable
Reliability Test Cronbach‟s Alpha More than 0,6 -
Composite Reliability More than 0,7 -
Source: Abdillah & Hartono (2015:196)
3.6.2 Evaluation of Structural Model (Inner Model)
The structural model describes the causality relationship between
latent variables (Abdillah & Hartono, 2015:197). Structural model in PLS
is evaluated by using R2 and the coefficient path by comparing t-statistic
value with t-table value at smart PLS output.
a. Using R2
R2 value is utilized to measure the degree of variation changes of the
independent variables on the dependent variable. The values describe
how much latent dependent variables can be affected by independent

62
latent variables. The higher the R-value means the better the
prediction model from the proposed research models (Abdillah &
Hartono, 2015:197).
b. Coefficient Path
Using the value of the coefficient path or t-values of each path is
essential to test the significance between variables in the structural
model. Thus, this model is applied to indicate the significance level in
hypothesis testing. The path coefficient value is explained by t-
statistics which will be compared with the t-table value in hypothesis
testing. T-table for the one tailed hypothesis is 1.64. If the value of t-
statistics is greater than the t-table value, it is thus indicated that the
hypothesis is accepted (Abdillah & Hartono, 2015:197).
3.7. Pilot Test
It is important to ensure that the research instruments of a particular
concept could accurately measure variables. The use of appropriate
instruments will ensure the accuracy of the results to improve the quality of
the research. Therefore, a pretest needs to be performed to develop the
questionnaire and to find out how far the respondent understands the
questions.
The researcher distributes online questionnaires to non-respondents
which are the students of Faculty of Administration Science, Brawijaya
University and collected data by 50 respondents. The results of the pre-test is
presented in Table 3.3 and Table 3.4.

63
Table 3.3
Algorithm (Pilot Test)
Composite Average Variance

Cronbach's Alpha rho_A
Reliability Extracted (AVE)
BI 0,875 0,879 0,914 0,728

EE 0,803 0,811 0,872 0,631
H 0,914 0,916 0,939 0,795
HM 0,809 0,870 0,884 0,719
PE 0,789 0,793 0,877 0,703
PV_ 0,812 0,814 0,888 0,727
SI 0,857 0,937 0,910 0,773
UB 0,756 0,785 0,859 0,671
Source: Primary Data ( Processed)
BI: Behavioral Intention; EE: Effort Expectancy; H: Habit; HM: Hedonic
Motivation; PE: Performance Expectancy; PV: Price Value; SI: Social
Influence; UB: Use Behavior
64
Table 3.4
Outer Loadings (Pilot Test)
BI EE H HM PE PV_ SI UB
BI1 0,840
BI2 0,818
BI3 0,865
BI4 0,888
EE1 0,861
EE2 0,739
EE3 0,746
EE4 0,824
H1 0,861
H2 0,916
H3 0,930
H4 0,858
HM1 0,790
HM2 0,830
HM3 0,918
PE1 0,822
PE2 0,831
PE3 0,862
PV1 0,870
PV2 0,879
PV3 0,807
SI1 0,929
SI2 0,937
SI3 0,760
UB1 0,891
UB2 0,735
UB3 0,824

Based on the above table, the results of data processing present a value
fulfilling the criteria of validity and reliability because:

65
1. The AVE value and Communality in Table 3.3 for each construct is more
than 0.5 (>0.5).
2. The Cronbach‟s Alpha value is more than 0.6 (>0.6) and Composite
Reliability value is more than 0.7 (>0.7).
3. The Outer Loadings test results in the Table 3.4 above show all indicator
values to be more than 0.7 (>0.7).

CHAPTER IV
FINDING AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Results of Data Collection
4.1.1 Respondents
Respondents in this research include active undergraduate students of
Accounting Department, Faculty of Economics and Business, Brawijaya
University who ever used or still use OVO application. It has previously
described that this research utilizes survey method by distributing
questionnaires to the respondents. The researcher conducts the data
collection for two weeks by directly distributing manual and online
questionnaires by applying Google Forms.
The number of questionnaires distributed online is 400 and is received
as many as 369. After checking, 41 questionnaires are invalid for research
data, because:
1. Questions or statements are not filled completely by the
respondents.
2. The respondents never use OVO.
3. Inconsistent answers given to the question result in biased answer.
Thus, the level of respondent‟s rate in this research is 92,25%; as the
total questionnaires that can be processed as sample of this research is 328.
The number of samples and the rate of return of questionnaires is
presented on Table 4.1.
66
67
Table 4.1
Sample, Usable Responds, and Response Rate
Questionnaire
Description Online
Questionnaires are distributed 400
Questionnaires are not returned 30
Questionnaires are returned 369
Questionnaires that are unusable 41
Questionnaires which are usable 328
Response Rate 92.25%
Usable Response Rate 82%
4.1.2 Demographic Characteristics
An overview of respondents of this research is described in the form
of tables and figures. Tables and figures will be explained based on some
particular compositions based on gender, age, semester, duration as well as
frequency of the respondents in using OVO application.

68
Table 4.2
The Composition of Respondents based on Gender
No. Gender Total Respondents Percentage
1 Female 187 57.1%
2 Male 141 42.9%
Total 328 100%
Figure 4.1
The Composition of Respondents based on Gender
GENDER
60,00%
50,00%
FEMALE
40,00%
MALE
30,00%
20,00%
10,00%
0,00%
42,90% 57,10%
Based on Table 4.2 and Figure 4.1, the gender distribution in the survey are
amounted to 328 persons. 187 participants are female (57.1%) and 141
participants are male (42.9%). Based on the data above, the highest composition
of gender is female.
The composition of respondents by age is indicated by the following Table
4.3 and Figure 4.2.

69
Table 4.3
The Composition of Respondents based on Age
No. Age Total Respondents Percentage
1 < 18 10 3.28%
2 18 – 20 151 46.03%
3 21 – 23 160 48.56%
4 >23 7 2.13%
TOTAL 328 100%
Source: Primary Data (processed)
Figure 4.2
The Composition of Respondents based on Age
Age
46,03%
50,00% 48,56%%
45,00%
40,00%
35,00%
30,00%
25,00%
20,00%
15,00%
10,00%
3,28%
5,00% 2,13%
0,00%
< 18 18 - 20 21 - 23 > 23
< 18 18 - 20 21 - 23 > 23

70
Based on Table 4.3 and Figure 4.2 above, 10 respondents are less than
18 years old (3.28%), 152 respondents are in the range of 18-20 (46.03%),
160 respondents are in the range 21-23 (48.56%) and 7 respondents are
students with more than 23 years old.
Table 4.4
The Composition of Respondents based on Semester
No. Semester Total Respondents Percentage
1 1 50 15.2%
2 3 38 11.5%
3 5 57 17.4%
4 7 140 42.6%
5 >7 43 13.3%
Total 328 100%

71
Figure 4.3
The Composition of Respondents based on Semester
Semester
42.6%
45,00%
40,00%
35,00%
30,00%
25,00%
17.4%
20,00% 15.2%
11.5% 13,30%
15,00%
10,00%
5,00%
0,00%
Semester 1 Semester 3 Semester 5 Semester 7 Semester >7
Semester 1 Semester 3 Semester 5 Semester 7 Semester >7
The results above indicate that the students participated in the survey
are classified into five groups. From the total 328 respondents, about 15.2%
students are in the first semester, 11,5% are in the third semester, 17.4% are
in fifth semester, 42.6% are in seventh semester and 13.3% are in more than
7 semester. It can be concluded that the majority of the respondents are
students on their seventh semester.
The composition of the respondents based on the duration of using
OVO is depicted on the following Table 4.5 and Figure 4.4.

72
Table 4.5
The Composition of Respondents based on the Duration in Using OVO
No. Duration in Using OVO Total of Respondents Percentage
1 < 1 month 95 28.99%
2 1 – 3 month 87 26.5%
3 3 – 4 month 70 21.34%
4 >6 month 76 23.17%
Total 328 100%
Figure 4.4
The Composition of Respondents based on the Duration in Using OVO
Duration
28,99%
30,00% 26,50%
23,17%
25,00% 21,34%
20,00%
15,00%
10,00%
5,00%
0,00%
< 1 month 1 - 3 month 3 - 4 month > 6 month
< 1 month 1 - 3 month 3 - 4 month > 6 month
The previously presented table and figure present the duration of
respondents in using OVO application. About 95 students (28.99%) have
one month experience, 88 students (26.50%) have 1 – 3 months experience,

73
70 students (21.34%) and 76 students (23.17%) similarly have more than 6
months experience. Therefore, it can be concluded that most respondents
have been using OVO for less than 1 month.
The composition of respondents based on the frequency of using OVO
in a month are illustrated in the following Table 4.6 and Figure 4.5.
Table 4.6
The Composition of Respondents based on the Frequency in Using OVO
within a Month
No. Frequency in a Month Total Respondents Percentage
1 < 3 times 149 45.43%
2 3 – 5 times 67 20.42%
3 6 – 8 times 51 15.56%
4 > 8 times 61 18.59%
Total 328 100%

74
Figure 4.5
The Composition of Respondents based on the Frequency in Using OVO
within a Month
Frequency
50,00% 45,43%
45,00%
40,00%
35,00%
30,00%
25,00% 20,42%
18,59%
20,00% 15,56%
15,00%
10,00%
5,00%
0,00%
< 3 times 3 - 5 times 6 - 8 times > 8 times
< 3 times 3 - 5 times 6 - 8 times > 8 times
4.1.3 Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics is defined as a method related to the collection
and presentation of a range of data to provide useful information and to
assist in formulating conclusion (Wikipedia, 2015). The statistics
measurement is required to describe the termination of observed values;
thus, it simplifies sample observations. Through this calculation, a broad
picture of the sample will be obtained to approach the nature of the
population.
75
In this research, analysis of descriptive statistics is conducted on 328
respondents and the statistical measurements of the sample utilize Microsoft
Office Excel 2013.
In this research, (n) is used to determine the number of respondents.
Number 1 to 7 determine the scale of response. Frequency (f) is used to
determine the number of response preferring that scale. The mean value is
utilized to determine the average opinion given by respondent on each item
statement for each variable. If the mean value for each variable is greater
than 4.00, it shows that the average respondents agree to the overall
statement items in each variable in this research.
4.1.3.1 Performance Expectancy
In the variable of Performance Expectancy, there are 3 items of
questions. Overall, the answers of respondents are diverse. The result of
frequency distribution of Performance Expectancy is depicted in the
following Table 4.7.
Table 4.7
Frequency Distribution of Performance Expectancy Variable (X1)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Amount
Item Mean
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % N %
PE1 51 15,55 94 28,66 86 26,22 54 16,46 21 6,40 15 4,57 7 2,13 328 100 5,08
PE2 35 10,67 70 21,34 73 22,26 89 27,13 35 10,67 21 6,40 5 1,52 328 100 4,69
PE3 47 14,33 77 23,48 98 29,88 68 20,73 18 5,49 16 4,88 4 1,22 328 100 5,01
4,93

76
Table 4.7 shows that the number of respondents (n) in this research is
328. The mean value on Table 4.7 is 4.93, which shows that the average
respondents agree to the overall statement items in this variable.
4.1.3.2 Effort Expectancy
In the variable of Effort Expectancy, there are 4 items of questions.
Overall, the answers of respondents are diverse. The result of frequency
distribution of Effort Expectancy is presented in the following Table 4.8.
Table 4.8
Frequency Distribution of Effort Expectancy Variable (X2)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Amount
Item Mean
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % N %
EE1 45 13,72 91 27,74 111 33,84 54 16,46 10 3,05 12 3,66 5 1,52 328 100 5,16
EE2 51 15,55 94 28,66 114 34,76 42 12,80 14 4,27 10 3,05 3 0,91 328 100 5,26
EE3 70 21,34 120 36,59 89 27,13 30 9,15 8 2,44 8 2,44 3 0,91 328 100 5,54
EE4 63 19,21 126 38,41 87 26,52 38 11,59 6 1,83 5 1,52 3 0,91 328 100 5,53
5,37
328. The mean value on Table 4.8 n is 5.37 which shows that the average
4.1.3.3 Social Influence
In the variable of Social Influence, there are 3 items of questions.
distribution of Social Influence is illustrated in the following Table 4.9.

77
Table 4.9
Frequency Distribution of Social Influence Variable (X3)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Amount
Item Mean
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % N %
SI1 39 11,89 58 17,68 59 17,99 105 32,01 37 11,28 20 6,10 10 3,05 328 100 4,56
SI2 39 11,89 67 20,43 65 19,82 87 26,52 39 11,89 20 6,10 11 3,35 328 100 4,62
SI3 30 9,15 53 16,16 81 24,70 93 28,35 41 12,50 22 6,71 8 2,44 328 100 4,51
4,57
328. The mean value on Table 4.9 is 4.57 which shows that the average
4.1.3.4 Price Value
In the variable of Price Value, there are 3 items of questions. Overall,
the answers of respondents are diverse. The result of frequency distribution
of Price Value is illustrated in the following Table 4.10.
Table 4.10
Frequency Distribution of Price Value (X4)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Amount
Item Mean
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % N %
PV1 48 14,63 117 35,67 112 34,15 27 8,23 12 3,66 8 2,44 4 1,22 328 100 5,37
PV2 44 13,41 109 33,23 120 36,59 33 10,06 13 3,96 5 1,52 4 1,22 328 100 5,33
PV3 57 17,38 113 34,45 103 31,40 35 10,67 9 2,74 6 1,83 5 1,52 328 100 5,41
5,37

78
4.1.3.5 Hedonic Motivation
In the variable of Hedonic Motivation, there are 3 items of questions.
distribution of Price Value is illustrated in the following Table 4.11.
Table 4.11
Frequency Distribution of Hedonic Motivation (X5)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Amount
Item Mean
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % N %
HM1 46 14,02 103 31,40 84 25,61 67 20,43 17 5,18 9 2,74 2 0,61 328 100 5,18
HM2 37 11,28 84 25,61 88 26,83 86 26,22 15 4,57 13 3,96 5 1,52 328 100 4,95
HM3 49 14,94 91 27,74 100 30,49 60 18,29 18 5,49 7 2,13 3 0,91 328 100 5,18
5,10
respondent agrees to the overall statement items in this variable.
4.1.3.6 Habit
In the variable of Habit, there are 4 items of questions. Overall, the
answers of respondents are diverse. The result of frequency distribution of
Price Value is presented in the following table 4.12.

79
Table 4.12
Frequency Distribution of Habit Variable (X6)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Amount
Item Mean
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % N %
H1 34 10,37 58 17,68 79 24,09 72 21,95 36 10,98 32 9,76 17 5,18 328 100 4,45
H2 29 8,84 49 14,94 72 21,95 83 25,30 28 8,54 45 13,72 22 6,71 328 100 4,22
H3 30 9,15 75 22,87 54 16,46 81 24,70 44 13,41 20 6,10 24 7,32 328 100 4,42
H4 57 17,38 70 21,34 94 28,66 57 17,38 26 7,93 8 2,44 16 4,88 328 100 4,96
4,51
328. The mean value on Table 4.12 is 4.51which shows that the average
4.1.3.7 Behavioral Intention
In the variable of Behavioral Intention, there are 4 items of questions.
distribution of Behavioral Intention is presented in the following Table 4.13.
Table 4.13
Frequency Distribution of Behavioral Intention Variable (X7)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Amount
Item Mean
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % N %
BI1 57 17,38 91 27,74 102 31,10 50 15,24 15 4,57 6 1,83 7 2,13 328 100 5,24
BI2 46 14,02 74 22,56 100 30,49 60 18,29 27 8,23 14 4,27 7 2,13 328 100 4,95
BI3 40 12,20 91 27,74 112 34,15 58 17,68 13 3,96 11 3,35 3 0,91 328 100 5,13
BI4 52 15,85 93 28,35 102 31,10 56 17,07 13 3,96 8 2,44 4 1,22 328 100 5,23
5,14

80
328. The mean value on Table 4.13 is 5.14 which it shows that the average
respondent agree to the overall statement items in this variable.
4.1.3.8 Use Behavior
In the variable of Use Behavior, there are 3 items of questions.
distribution of Behavioral Intention is depicted in the following table 4.14.
Table 4.14
Frequency Distribution of Use Behavior Variable (X8)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Amount
Item Mean
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % N %
UB1 30 9,15 84 25,61 87 26,52 67 20,43 29 8,84 21 6,40 10 3,05 328 100 4,74
UB2 26 7,93 66 20,12 88 26,83 79 24,09 36 10,98 21 6,40 12 3,66 328 100 4,56
UB3 42 12,80 109 33,23 84 25,61 43 13,11 17 5,18 19 5,79 14 4,27 328 100 5,01
4,77
respondent agree to the overall statement items in this variable.
4.1.4 Evaluation Model
Analysis towards the evaluation model in this research applies Partial
Least Squares (PLS) to estimate parameters and to predict relationships of
causality. Evaluation of the model is performed with three stages, including:

81
the testing of convergent validity, testing of discriminant validity, and
testing of reliability.
Table 4.15
Table of Algorithm
Composite Cronbach’s Communality

AVE R Square Redundancy
Reliability Alpha
EE 0,7895 0,9375 0,0000 0,9111 0,7895 0,0000
H 0,8179 0,9473 0,0000 0,9257 0,8179 0,0000
HM 0,8587 0,948 0,0000 0,9178 0,8587 0,0000
PE 0,7415 0,8959 0,0000 0,8259 0,7415 0,0000
PV 0,8321 0,9369 0,0000 0,8991 0,8321 0,0000
SI 0,8928 0,9615 0,0000 0,9400 0,8928 0,0000
BI 0,8273 0,9504 0,6654 0,9304 0,8273 0,0498
UB 0,7682 0,9085 0,3946 0,8488 0,7682 0,3029
EE: Effort Expectancy; H: Habit; HM: Hedonic Motivation; PE:

Performance Expectancy; PV: Price Value; SI: Social Influence; BI:
Behavior Intention; UB: Use Behavior
Convergent Validity. Assessment in convergent validity testing is
conducted based on the value of Average Variance Extracted (AVE),
communality, and the value of factor loading. Rule of thumb for both
parameter AVE and communality is more than (>) 0.50, and more than (>)
0.70 for the value of factor loading. Additionally, indicators with a loading
factor value between 0.5 to 0.7 should not be removed as long as the AVE
and communality values are still above 0.5 (Abdillah & Hartono, 2015: 206)
Hair et al. (2006) in Hartono and Abdillah (2015) stated that the
rule of thumb is typically applied to make initial examination of the matrix

82
factor, where ± 0.30 is considered as having met the minimum level, loading
± 0.40 is considered better, and loading more than (>) 0.50 is considered
significantly practical. Besides the AVE and communality parameters in
Table 4.8, convergent validity can be determined based on the following
loading factors as presented in Table 4.16.
Table 4.16
Outer Loadings
BI EE H HM PE PV SI UB
BI1 0,918
BI2 0,896
BI3 0,927
BI4 0,897
EE1 0,878
EE2 0,897
EE3 0,909
EE4 0,869
H1 0,897
H2 0,931
H3 0,902
H4 0,887
HM1 0,933
HM2 0,921
HM3 0,927
PE1 0,853
PE2 0,855
PE3 0,876
PV1 0,880
PV2 0,922
PV3 0,934
SI1 0,938
SI2 0,955
SI3 0,941
UB1 0,909
UB2 0,856
UB3 0,863
83

Based on Table 4.15 above, it is apparent that the value of AVE and
Communality in each construct is more than 0.5. Similarly, the outer
loading test results in Table 4.16 show that all indicators value is above 0.7.
Thus, based on the processing results, it is concluded that the convergent
validity has been fulfilled.

84
Table 4.17
Cross Loadings
BI EE H HM PE PV SI UB
BI1 0,918 0,565 0,675 0,684 0,594 0,570 0,512 0,573
BI2 0,896 0,462 0,729 0,649 0,621 0,566 0,487 0,619
BI3 0,927 0,514 0,678 0,683 0,583 0,565 0,500 0,550
BI4 0,897 0,465 0,572 0,620 0,558 0,523 0,421 0,539
EE1 0,501 0,878 0,480 0,590 0,507 0,578 0,441 0,427
EE2 0,508 0,897 0,475 0,518 0,538 0,548 0,417 0,452
EE3 0,491 0,909 0,431 0,519 0,478 0,585 0,400 0,398
EE4 0,460 0,869 0,407 0,464 0,431 0,525 0,360 0,356
H1 0,642 0,480 0,897 0,605 0,579 0,564 0,466 0,540
H2 0,641 0,419 0,931 0,605 0,522 0,482 0,506 0,567
H3 0,667 0,397 0,902 0,597 0,523 0,467 0,489 0,576
H4 0,695 0,528 0,887 0,606 0,554 0,558 0,486 0,569
HM1 0,690 0,551 0,615 0,933 0,608 0,660 0,524 0,515
HM2 0,680 0,579 0,624 0,921 0,605 0,616 0,538 0,529
HM3 0,645 0,507 0,618 0,927 0,532 0,593 0,566 0,510
PE1 0,522 0,475 0,471 0,497 0,853 0,554 0,369 0,358
PE2 0,563 0,450 0,547 0,537 0,855 0,480 0,395 0,454
PE3 0,588 0,498 0,535 0,587 0,876 0,578 0,431 0,466
PV1 0,497 0,536 0,460 0,510 0,482 0,880 0,410 0,337
PV2 0,585 0,568 0,577 0,657 0,605 0,922 0,496 0,455
PV3 0,587 0,616 0,525 0,662 0,609 0,934 0,467 0,428
SI1 0,508 0,418 0,519 0,566 0,438 0,472 0,938 0,473
SI2 0,513 0,472 0,510 0,556 0,440 0,496 0,955 0,482
SI3 0,478 0,402 0,497 0,535 0,436 0,459 0,941 0,474
UB1 0,579 0,455 0,595 0,544 0,448 0,438 0,479 0,909
UB2 0,542 0,364 0,540 0,476 0,461 0,380 0,477 0,856
UB3 0,530 0,390 0,500 0,446 0,397 0,359 0,365 0,863

Discriminant Validity. After assessing convergent validity, the next
step is to measure the discriminant validity. Discriminant validity of the
assessment is based on the value of the Cross Loading in Table 4.10, which
85
is more than 0.7 in one variable or construct. Based on the table, it is
concluded that the discriminant validity is met for each indicator in each
variable reaching over 0.7. Despite the same conditions as the previous
loading factor assessment, if it is a value of lower than 0.7, it is still
considered valid because they have other parameters with value of more
than 0.5.
Reliability Testing. After the test of construct‟s validity is
accomplished and valid data are obtained, reliability takes place for further
testing. Reliability test can be performed by using two methods of:
Cronbach's Alpha value, whose value must be more than (>) 0.6, and
Composite Reliability value, whose value should be more than (>) 0.7.
According to algorithm table 4.15 above, all variables have the value of
Cronbach's Alpha which are more than (>) 0.6 and Composite Reliability of
more than (>) 0.7. Hence, the data and the results of measurements are
considered reliable. Based on the test results of convergent validity,
discriminant validity and reliability testing can be concluded by using
algorithm models on Figure 4.17 below.

86
Figure 4.6
Algorithm Model
4.2 Hypothesis Testing
After a test of convergent validity, discriminant validity and reliability
testing, the next step is to perform the hypothesis testing. Based on the data
processing, the form of Total Effects is illustrated in the following Table 4.18.
In one-tailed hypothesis testing, if the coefficient path shown by the T-
Statistic is more than or equal (≥) 1.64, then the alternative hypothesis can be
stated as supported. Nevertheless, if the statistical value of T-Statistic is less

87
than or equal (≤) 1.64, then the alternative hypothesis is stated as not
supported. From processing the data in Total Effects Table 4.18, it is apparent
that the T-Statistic value for each construction is valid whether the hypothesis
is supported.
Table 4.18
T-Statistic Value
Original Sample Standard Standard

Variable T Statistics
Hypothesis Sample Mean Deviation Error
Correlation (|O/STERR|)
(O) (M) (STDEV) (STERR)
1 PE -> BI 0,170 0,169 0,056 0,056 3,022
2 EE -> BI 0,058 0,059 0,052 0,052 1,114
3 SI -> BI 0,035 0,032 0,055 0,055 0,646
4 PV -> BI 0,051 0,053 0,065 0,065 0,787
5 HM -> BI 0,289 0,281 0,067 0,067 4,340
6 H -> BI 0,359 0,366 0,061 0,061 5,907
7 BI -> UB 0,628 0,631 0,047 0,047 13,347

a. Hypothesis 1
Hypothesis 1 states that performance expectancy construction has a
positive influence on the behavioral intention in using OVO. From Table
4.18, it can be seen that the value of T-Statistics of perceived usefulness
construction towards behavioral intention in using OVO is 3.022, which
is greater than the value of T-table (1.64). It indicates that performance
expectancy has a positive effect on the behavioral intention to use OVO.
Based on the results, it is determined that Hypothesis 1 is supported.

88
This result is consistent with researches conducted by Aldas-
Manzano, Lassala-Navarre, Ruiz-Mafe, and Sanz-Blas (2009), Y.-K.
Lee, Park, Chung, and Blakeney (2012), Muñoz-Leiva et al. (2017),
Alalwan et al. (2018), Chopdar et al. (2018), Chong, 2013; Lai and Lai
(2014), Yu-Jen Su (2009), Dasgupta et al. (2011), Mortimer et al. (2015),
Riquelme and Rios (2010) and Carlos and Oliveira (2017).
b. Hypothesis 2
Hypothesis 2 states that effort expectancy construction has a
positive influence on the behavioral intention to use OVO. From Table
4.11, it is apparent that the value of T-Statistics of effort expectancy
construction towards behavioral intention in using OVO is 1.114, which
is lower than the value of T-table (1.64). It indicates that effort
expectancy does not affect the behavioral intention to use OVO. Based
on the results, it can be stated that Hypothesis 2 is not supported.
This result is inconsistent with researches conducted by Alalwan et
al. (2016), Dasgupta et al. (2011), Thakur & Srivastava (2013), Mortimer
et al. (2015), Koksal (2016), Wang et al. (2003), Luarn & Lin (2005),
Muñoz-Leiva et al. (2017), Gu et al. (2009), Riquelme & Rios (2010),
Bashir and Madhavaiah (2015) as well as Carlos and Oliveira (2017), but
is consistent with the researches conducted by Wua and Wang (2005),
Al-Jabri (2015), Makanyeza (2017) and Koenig‐Lewis et al. (2010).

89
c. Hypothesis 3
Hypothesis 3 states that social influence construction has a positive
influence on the behavioral intention to use OVO. From Table 4.18, it is
apparent that the value of t-Statistics of social influence construction
towards behavioral intention in using OVO is 0.646, which is lower than
the value of t-table (1.64). It indicates that social influence does not
affect the behavioral intention to use OVO. Based on the results, it can be
stated that Hypothesis 3 is not supported.
This result is inconsistent with researches conducted by Oliveira et
al (2014), Tharini et al (2016), Yang et al (2012), Tsu Wei et al (2009),
Martins et al (2014), Abrahãoa et al. (2016), but is consistent with the
researches conducted by Alalwan et al (2018) and Chopdar (2018).
d. Hypothesis 4
Hypothesis 4 states that price value construction has a positive
apparent that the value of T-Statistics of price value construction towards
behavioral intention in using OVO is 0.787, which is lower than the
value of t-table (1.64). It indicates that price value does not affect the
behavioral intention to use OVO. Based on the results, it can be stated
that Hypothesis 4 is not supported.
This result is inconsistent with researches conducted by Arenas-
Gaitán et al. (2015), Baptista and Oliveira (2017), Alalwan et al. (2018),
and Chopdar et al. (2018), but is consistent with the research conducted
90
by Baptista and Oliveira (2015), Koenig-Lewis et al. (2010) and Yang et
al. (2012).
e. Hypothesis 5
Hypothesis 5 states that Hedonic Motivation construction has a
positive influence on the behavioral intention to use OVO. From Table
4.18, it is apparent that the value of t-Statistics of Hedonic Motivation
construction towards behavioral intention in using OVO is 4,340, which
is greater than the value of t-table (1.64). It indicates that hedonic
motivation has a positive effect on the behavioral intention to use OVO.
Based on the results, it can be stated that Hypothesis 5 is supported.
This result is consistent with researches conducted by Dodds et al.
(1991), Alalwan et al. (2018) and Chopdar et al. (2018).
f. Hypothesis 6
Hypothesis 6 states that Habit construction has a positive
apparent that the value of t-Statistics of habit construction towards
behavioral intention in using OVO is 5,907, which is greater than the
value of t-table (1.64). It indicates that habit has a positive effect on the
behavioral intention to use OVO. Based on the results, it can be stated
that Hypothesis 6 is supported.
This result is consistent with researches conducted by Ajzen
(2002), Baptista and Olivera (2015), Hew et al. (2015), Kim (2012),
Alalwan et al. (2018) and Chopdar et al. (2018).

91
g. Hypothesis 7
Hypothesis 7 states that Behavioral Intention construction has a
positive influence on OVO Customer‟s use behavior. From Table 4.18, it
can be seen that the value of T-Statistics of behavioral intention
construction towards OVO Customer‟s use behavior is 13,347, which is
greater than the value of t-table (1.64). It indicates that behavioral
intention has a positive effect on OVO Customer‟s use behavior. Based
on the results, it can be stated that Hypothesis 7 is supported.
This result is consistent with researches conducted by Davis,
Bagozi, and Warshaw (1989), Dabholkar and Bagozzi (2002), Lucas and
Spitler (1999), Vijayasarathy (2004), Gro (2015), and Chopdar et al.
(2018).
The summary of hypotheses testing results are illustrated in the
following Table 4.19.

92
Table 4.19
Summary of Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis t- Statistics Result
Performance Expectancy has a positive

H1 influence on behavioral intention to use 3.0220 Supported
OVO
Effort Expectancy has a positive

H2 influence on behavioral intention to use 1.1140 Not supported
OVO
Social influence has a positive influence

H3 0.6460 Not Supported
on behavioral intention to use OVO
Price value has a positive influence on

H4 0.7870 Not Supported
behavioral intention to use OVO
Hedonic Motivation has a positive

H5 influence on behavioral intention to use 4.340 Supported
OVO
Habit has a positive influence on

H6 5.9070 Supported
behavioral intention to use OVO
Behavioral intention has a positive

H7 influence on OVO Customer‟s use 13.347 Supported
behavior
4.3 Discussion and Results
Based on the hypothesis testing results above, it is indicated that
performance expectancy, hedonic motivation, and habit construction
positively affect behavioral intention to use OVO and behavioral intention
construction also positively affect OVO Customer‟s use behavior. However,
the results also demonstrate that effort expectancy, social influence, and price
93
value construct have no positive effect on behavioral intention to use OVO.
Based on the results, the researcher conducts a validity finding by seeking
explanation for results of the already tested hypotheses . The validity of the
discoveries are analyzed by using journals and research models to support the
statement that has previously been disclosed.
4.3.1 Performance Expectancy on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H1)
Performance Expectancy in communication technology implies that
users consider the mobile app to be beneficial which enables them to
accomplish their goal-oriented tasks (Venkatesh et al., 2013). From a
measurement point of view, PE extends the concept of perceived usefulness
(PU) from the original specification of the Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM); whereas, perceived usefulness is defined as the level of trust or
belief of an individual that using a particular technology would increase
one‟s performance, efficiency, effectiveness and productivity (Davis, 1989;
Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). Both of those constructs are related to the
process of decision-making; if users believe that using a technology is
useful and would enhance their performance, then they will use it. However,
if they feel that using a technology is useless and does not help their
performance, then they will not use it.
Hypothesis 1 in this research states that performance expectancy has a
positive influence on behavioral intention to use OVO. The test result shows
that the value of its t-Statistics is 3.022, wich is greater than the value of t-
table (1.64). Based on the result, it is concluded that perceived usefulness
has a positive effect on the behavioral intention in using OVO.Thus,

94
hypothesis 1 is supported. This result is consistent with researches
conducted by Lai and Lai (2014), and Dasgupta et al. (2011).
Dasgupta et al. (2011) also conducted a research by investigating the
antecedents to behavioral intention of mobile banking usage of Indian
customers by using extended TAM and theory of innovation resistance. The
data were obtained and analyzed by using factor analysis from the sample of
370 mature customers and 1155 young customers who had no previous
exposure to mobile banking. The result of this research showed that
perceived usefulness significantly affected behavioral intention towards
mobile banking usage.
Lai and Lai (2014) examined the positive and negative factors that
could significantly explain user acceptance of mobile commerce (m-
commerce) in Macau. A technology acceptance model for m-commerce
with five factors was constructed. The proposed model was tested by using
data collected from 219 respondents. The findings indicated that
performance expectancy was one of the primary determinants of the
intention to use OVO which was consistent with the studies byAldas-
Manzano, Lassala-Navarre, Ruiz-Mafe and Sanz-Blas (2009), Y.-K. Lee,
Park, Chung and Blakeney (2012), Muñoz-Leiva et al. (2017), Alalwan et
al. (2018), Chopdar et al. (2018), Mortimer et al. (2015), Yu-Jen Su (2009),
Riquelme and Rios (2010), Carlos and Oliveira (2017) as well as by
Baptista and Oliveira (2015).In conclusion, greater user believes that OVO
can be useful, proven by greater intention to use it. Specifically, OVO itself
can provide benefits in helping user to complete transaction such as paying

95
goods and services. Thus, performance expectancy becomes one of the
determinants of behavioral intention in using OVO.
4.3.2 Effort Expectancy on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H2)
Effort expectancy (EE) is described as “the degree of ease associated
with consumers‟ use of technology” (Venkatesh et al., 2012). It is measured
by extending the perceived ease of use (PEOU) from the Technology
Acceptance Model with items capturing usage complexity and general ease
of use. Converted into this reasearch context, either effort expectancy or
perceived ease of use is the consumer‟s perception that using OVO will
involve minimum effort. It also can be said that effort expectancy is a belief
related to decision-making process; if users feel confident that the
information system is easy to use, then they would use it.
Hypothesis 2 in this research stated that effort expectancy has a
positive influence on behavioral intention to use OVO. However, the test
result shows that the value of its t-Statistics is 1.1140, which is lower than
the value of t-table (1.64). Based on the result, it is concluded that effort
expectancy does not have a positive and significant effect on the behavioral
intention to use OVO. Thus, hypothesis 2 is not supported. This result is not
consistent with studies conducted by Alalwan et al. (2016), Dasgupta et al.
(2011), Thakur and Srivastava (2013), Mortimer et al. (2015), Koksal
(2016), Wang et al. (2003), Luarn and Lin (2005), Muñoz-Leiva et al.
(2017), Gu et al. (2009), Riquelme and Rios (2010), Bashir and Madhavaiah
(2015) as well as by Carlos & Oliveira (2017) which proved that either
effort expectancy perceived ease of use positively affect behavioral

96
intention to use OVO. Nevertheless, this result is consistent with the studies
conducted by Wua & Wang (2005), Al-Jabri (2015), Ernovianti et al.
(2012), Makanyeza (2017) and Koenig-Lewis et al. (2010).
A research by Wua and Wang (2005) presented an extended
technology acceptance model (TAM) that integrated innovation diffusion
theory, perceived risk as well as cost construct to investigate what
determines user mobile commerce acceptance. The data were collected from
a survey of mobile commerce consumers then were empirically evaluated
by using structural equation modelling (SEM) and confirmatory factor
analysis. The result indicated that all variables except perceived ease of use
significantly affected user‟s behavioral intention to use mobile commerce.
Wu and Wang stated that perceived ease of use (in UTAUT 2 called as
“effort expectancy”) affected on intention would subside over a period of
time as the user was experienced with the specific system. In past years, it
was noticeable that customers and businesses had been transformed, in
which most consumers were computer users having experienced a lot of
online transactions and frequently used cellular phones for convenience.
Referring to that phenomenon, it is unimportant matter whether the
respondent felt easy with the use of the system, and would be ignored.
Al-Jabri (2015) also developed a research to understand the factors
that affected the intention to use mobile banking services in Saudi Arabia.
The data were obtained by a paper-based survey of 253 respondents and
were empirically tested by using Partial Least Squares (PLS). The result
indicated that perceived ease of use did not have significant effect on
97
intention in using mobile banking. The possible explanation presents that
almost 67% of the sample respondents never used mobile banking at all.
Thus, they might perceive mobile banking as easy and useful as any other
alternative channels, such as ATM, telephone and internet banking.
However, they had difficulty evaluating the ease of use of mobile banking
and were not able to express their perceptions accurately towards mobile
banking experience.
In addition, respondents might feel using OVO was not significantly
too different from using cash system of payment or using the other e-money
or e-wallet or the consumers had difficulty to evaluate the ease of use of
OVO and was not able to express their expectation clearly in using OVO.
Thus, effort expectancy is not of the determinant to predict user‟s behavioral
intention in using OVO.
4.3.3 Social Influence on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H3)
Social influence is defined by Venkatesh et al (2003) as “the extent to
which an individual perceives that he or she should apply the new system”.
In this research, social influence can be defined as a belief in which an
individual behavior engages in using OVO that will be influenced by the
opinions of their environment, such as family and friends.
Hypothesis 3 in this research stated that social influence has a positive
influence on behavioral intention to use OVO. The result shows that the
value of its t-Statistics is 0.6460, which is lower than the value of T-table
(1.64). Based on the result, it is concluded that social influence has no
positive and significant effect on behavioral intention in using OVO. Thus,

98
hypothesis 3 is not supported. This result is inconsistent with researches
conducted by Oliveira et al (2014), Tharini et al (2016), Yang et al (2012),
Tsu Wei et al (2009), Martins et al (2014), Abrahãoa et al. (2016), but is
consistent with the research conducted by Alalwan et al (2018), Chopdar
(2018), and Hew et al. (2015)
A research by Alalwan et al. (2018) examine a conceptual model that
best explains the key factors influencing Jordanian Customers‟ intentions
and adoption of Internet banking. The conceptual model proposed was
based on the extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of
Technology (UTAUT2). Structural equation modelling (SEM) was
conducted to analyse the data collected from the field survey questionnaire
as administred to a convenience sample of Jordanian banking customers. Th
result shows that social influence influence does not have a significant
impact on behavioral intention.
Similarly, Hew et al. (2015) considered that lack of understanding of
the mobile applications (mobile apps) market and low usage rates among
Malaysians, and adapted Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of
Technology 2 (UTAUT2) to investigate the determinants of consumer
behavioral intention to use mobile apps. A total of 288 sample data was
collected and analysed by using Partial Least Square equation modelling
(PLS-SEM) method. The findings showed that social influence has no
positive effect to behavioral intention to use mobile applications.
In line with those two studies, the study of Chopdar et al. (2018)
investigated factors predicting consumer behavioral intention and use

99
behavior towards mobile shopping apps, considering the impact of two
manifestations of soncumer‟s perceived risk: Privacy Risk and Security Risk
by adapting Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2
(UTAUT2). Active users of mobile shopping apps were chosen the target
population for this study, and the questionnaire was distributed online to
respondents from two consumer panels for India and US which were
sourced from a market research company. The findings also showed that
social influence had insignificant impact to behavioral intention. However,
mobile shopping was perceived as a highly personal activity, where people
around the consumers could not influence their beliefs and behavior for both
countries.
Based on the explanations above, it is concluded that social influence
is not one of the determinants of behavioral intention to use OVO, because,
people around the consumers (especially in undergraduate accounting
students of Faculty of Economics and Business at Brawijaya University)
can not affect or control the beliefs and behavior to use OVO, whether it is
such a good social influnce.
4.3.4 Price Value on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H4)
Price value is conceptualised as “consumer‟s cognitive trade-off
between the perceived benefits of the application and the monetary cost for
using it” (Venkatesh et al., 2012). In comparison with organizational
context, using a particular technology over a customer context could carry
further financial cost on the customers. In other words, with a higher

100
positive level of price value, customers are more likely to adopt a new
technology.
Hypothesis 4 in this research states that price value has a positive
influence on behavioral intention to use OVO. The test result shows that the
value of its t-Statistics is 0.7870, which is lower than the value of t-table
(1.64). Based on the result, it can be concluded that price value does not
have positive and significant effect on the behavioral intention to use OVO.
Thus, hypothesis 4 is not supported. This result is inconsistent with
researches conducted by Arenas-Gaitán et al. (2015), Baptista and Oliveira
(2017), Alalwan et al. (2018), and Chopdar et al. (2018), but is consistent
with the researches conducted by Hew et al. (2015), Baptista and Oliveira
(2015), as well as by Koenig-Lewis et al. (2010).
Hew et al. (2015) considered the lack of understanding of the mobile
applications (mobile apps) and low usage rates among Malaysians, and
adapted Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2
(UTAUT2) to investigate the determinants of consumer behavioral intention
to use mobile apps. A total of 288 sample data was collected and analysed
by using Partial Least Square equation modelling (PLS-SEM) method. The
findings showed that price value had no positive effet to behavioral
intention to use mobile applications.
Accordingly, Baptista and Oliveira (2015) presented a research by
using extended unified theory of acceptance and use of technology
(UTAUT2) with cultural moderators to understand the behavioral intention
and acceptance of mobile banking in African customers. The research stated

101
that price value construction was not found statistically significant over the
behavioral intention in using mobile banking. This happens mainly due to
the fact that mobile banking service is actually seen as free of charges by
customers, without special fees, and with lower costs than other means or
financial channels.
Based on the explanations above, it can be concluded that price value
is not one of the determinants to predict behavioral intention to use OVO.
This is proven by the fact that even OVO gives us free of charges to use the
application to give cashback or discounts, people will still think twice to use
it, maybe they are prefer to use cash, debit, credit card or other e-money.
4.3.5 Hedonic Motivation on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H5)
According to Venkatesh et al. (2012), hedonic motivation is
conceptualised as the feeling of cheerfulness, joy or joyment, which is
stimulated by applying technology. In other words, the more enjoyable the
the technology, the more acceptable it is to the customers.
Hypothesis 5 in this research states that hedonic motivation has a
positive influence on behavioral intention to use OVO. The test result shows
that the value of its t-Statistics is 4.340, which is greater than the value of t-
table (1.64). Based on the result, it can be concluded that hedonic
motivation does have positive and significant effect on the behavioral
intention to use OVO. Thus, hypothesis 5 is supported. This result is
consistent with researches conducted by Childers et al. (2002), Van der
Heijden (2004), Hew et al. (2015), Alalwan et al. (2018), and Chopdar et al.
(2018).
102
Once, Van der Heijden (2004) also studied the differences in user
acceptance models for productivity-oriented (or utilitarian) and pleasure-
oriented (or hedonic) information systems. The paper reports a cross-
sectional survey on the usage intentions for one hedonic information system.
Analysis of this sample supports the hypotheses perceiving that enjoyment
is a stronger determinant of intentions to use.
In the other sides, Baptista and Oliveira (2015) presented a a research
by using extended unified theory of acceptance and use of technology
(UTAUT2) with cultural moderators to understand the behavioral intention
and acceptance of mobile banking in African customers. They found that
hedonic motivation could be the most significant antecedents of behavioral
intention.
The study of Hew et al. (2015) considered the lack of understanding
of the mobile applications (mobile apps) and low usage rates among
Malaysians, and adapted Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of
Technology 2 (UTAUT2) to investigate the determinants of consumer
behavioral intention to use mobile apps, as well as found that hedonic
motivation had positive effet to behavioral intention to use mobile
applications.
In line with Hew et al., Alalwan et al. (2018) also examined a
conceptual model that best explains the key factors influencing Jordanian
customers‟ intentions and adoption of Internet banking. The conceptual
model proposed was based on the extended of UTAUT, which was

103
UTAUT2. The result showed that behavioral intention was significantly
influenced by hedonic motivation.
Additionally, the study of Chopdar et al. (2018) investigated factors
predicting consumer behavioral intention and use behavior towards mobile
shopping apps, considering the impact of two manifestations of soncumer‟s
perceived risk, such as: Privacy Risk and Security Risk by adapting Unified
Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2), proving that
hedonic motivation had significant impact to behaviral intention.
Few years ago, Childers et al. (2002) investigated Hedonic and
Utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behavior. In this paper, an
attitudinal model is developed and empirically tested by integrating
constructions from technology acceptance research and are derived from
models of web behavior. Results of two studies from two distinct categories
of the interactive shopping environment support the differential importance
of immersive, hedonic aspects of the new media as well as the more
traditional utilitarian motivations. In other words, Hedonic motivation
positively affects online retail shopping behavior.
In conclusion, the more people enjoy and are happy to use OVO, the
more the intention to use it. Thus, hedonic motivation becomes one of the
determinants of behavioral intention in using OVO.
4.3.6 Habit on Behavioral Intention to Use OVO (H6)
Venkatesh et al. (2012) defined habit as “the extent to which people
tend to perform behavior automatically due to learning process.”. In other

104
words, the more common people use the technology, the more skillful they
are. The more skillful they are, the more they tend to use it too.
Hypothesis 6 in this research states that habit has a positive influence
on behavioral intention to use OVO. The test result shows that the value of
its t-Statistics is 5.9070, which is greater than the value of t-table (1.64).
Based on the result, it can be concluded that habit does have positive effect
and is the most significant determinant on the behavioral intention to use
OVO. Thus, hypothesis 6 is supported. This result is consistent with
researches conducted by Ajzen (2002), Baptista and Olivera (2015), Hew et
al. (2015), Kim (2012), Alalwan et al. (2018), and Chopdar et al. (2018)
who found out that habit is the most significant antecedents of behavioral
intention.
In conclusion, the more usual and addicted people to use OVO, the
more the intention to use it. Thus, habit becomes one of the determinants of
behavioral intention in using OVO.
4.3.7 Behavioral Intention to OVO Customers’ Use Behavior
Use behavior is not explicitly defined in UTAUT2, and in the original
specification, it is measured through the items available in the registered
system (Venkatesh et al., 2003). The main antecedent of Use Behavior in
the UTAUT model is framed as the Behavioral Intention (BI) and has a
single direct effect on individuals‟ actual use of a given technology. This
construct is derived from the theory of Reasoned Action and is defined as „a
measure of the strength of one‟s intention to perform a specified behavior‟
(Davis et al., 1989).

105
Hypothesis 7 in this research states that behavioral intention has a
positive influence on OVO customers‟ use behavior. The test result shows
that the value of its t-Statistics is 13.3470, which is greater than the value of
t-table (1.64). Based on the result, it can be concluded that behavioral
intention has a strong positive effect towards OVO consumers‟ behavior.
Thus, hypothesis 7 is supported. This result is consistent with researches
conducted by Ajzen (2002) in the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) which
describes the strong correlation between behavioral intention and actual
behavior. Several previous studies as conducted by Dabholkar and Bagozzi
(2002), Lucas and Spitler (1999), Vijayasarathy (2004), Gro (2015),
Aldas-Manzano et al. (2009), Yu (2012), also confirmed the powerful
correlation between behavioral intention and actual behavior, and Chopdar
(2018) also found that behavioral intention positively affects OVO
consumers‟ use behavior.
Based on the explanations above, it is concluded that Behavioral
intention becomes one of the strong determinants of OVO consumers‟ use
behavior.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Conclusion
This research aims to investigate the influence of performance
expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, price value, hedonic
motivation towards behavioral intention of undergraduate accounting students
at Faculty of Economics and Business, Brawijaya University in using OVO
and the behavioral intention of using OVO towards the use behavior of
undergraduate accounting students at Faculty of Economics and Business,
Brawijaya University. This research tests the construction of Unified Theory
of Acceptance and Usage Technology 2 (UTAUT 2). There are seven
important findings of this research, consisting of:
1. Firstly, the findings shows that the effect of performance expectancy on
the behavioral intention in using OVO is positive and significant. It means
that the students expect OVO as a technology which will be beneficial to
them. Therefore, they will generally open to use and learn it. Using OVO
is also helpful as it can be conducted in anywhere, anytime, and is also a
time-saving effort.
2. Secondly, the result shows that effort expectancy does not give a positive
and significant effect on the behavioral intention to use OVO. This
condition occurs as students can easily learn and become experienced
with a particular technology, causing the perception of effort expectancy
will be ignored whether it is easy for using the system. They also might
106
107
expect that OVO is not significantly too different from other e-money
platforms.
3. Thirdly, the result reveals that social influence attitude has no positive and
significant effect towards behavioral intention in using OVO. It means
that the intention and decision of students to adopt OVO will not be
influenced neither by the positive opinions nor negative opinions of their
external environment.
4. Fourthly, price value construction does not give a positive and significant
effect on the behavioral intention in using OVO. This happens due to the
fact that OVO gives abundant cashback and discount for payment, more
than any other e-money platforms, resulting in an insignificant impact on
behavioral intention.
5. Fifthly, hedonic motivation construction has a positive and significant
effect on the behavioral intention in using OVO. It means that, people
enjoy and feel happy to use OVO which can increase the self satisfaction
and self prestige in this consumtive condition.
6. Sixthly, habit construction from UTAUT 2 has the most positive and
significant effect on the behavioral intention to use OVO. This happens
due to the fact that the more frequent people use OVO, the more they
expert to use it.
7. Lastly, behavioral intention construction has the most positive and
significant effect on the OVO customers‟ use behavior. It means that, if
people have the strong intention to use OVO, it will strongly push the
108
actual behavior to use OVO. Therefore, if people have the weak intention
to use OVO, it will also weakly push the actual behavior to use OVO.
In conclusion, higher performance expectancy, hedonic motivation, and
habit wil more encourage the behavioral intention to use OVO. In line with
those findings, the higher the behavioral intention of the customers, the
higher the customers‟ use behavior to use OVO, meaning that higher
intention will affect higher possibility to use OVO.
5.2 Research Implications
Besides providing a great and beneficial explanation on the motivation
underlying the intention to use OVO, this research is also expected to also
strengthen empirical evidence from previous studies. This research shows the
determinant factors that can affect the interest to use OVO which are:
performance expectancy, hedonic motivation and habit, but are not for the
effort expectancy, social influence and price value. Additionaly, this research
also provides a great and beneficial explanation about the effect of behavioral
intention towards the use behavior.
The results of this research is expected to provide input for OVO in
developing electronic money service applications by paying attention to the
factors that influence customer‟s behavioral intention in using mobile banking.
This research explains the people‟s feeling towards using OVO which is
beneficial for them. Thus, OVO service is expected to always innovate and
add new features and also merchants on their application to attract more
customers. Needless to state, PT. Visionet Indonesia must develop OVO while
maintaining customer safety and privacy; therefore, the customers will feel
109
that OVO is useful and satisfying. Thus, the company has to pay attention in
improving OVO service to be more useful, helping people to achieve
important tasks, to improve productivity, to bring joy, fun, and entertainment.
It is also advised that the company has to consider about how OVO can make
the users be addicted, believing that using OVO is a must thing to do, in order
to improve the intention to use it.
Customers who are satisfied with OVO services will become loyal and
will likely influence people in their community to use it. The use word-of-
mouth marketing to achieve a more broadly service could be one of the most
effective methods besides using social media and traditional advertising
method. Providing necessary knowledge and resources such as support service
websites, online tutorial, demos and qualified bank personnel to offer a
helping hand to customers are also vital to increase customer‟s intention to use
mobile banking services.
If many customers are satisfied with OVO as their electronic money
option and if the intention of people is high, the possibility to use it will also
increase, then this service will continue to grow and the company could get
advantages from customer satisfaction.
5.3 Research Limitations
The use of convenience sampling method also has its weakness,
such as a lower level of generalization than other sampling techniques.
However, convenience sampling method is chosen because the researcher
does not have any information on the number of undergraduate accounting

110
students in Faculty of Economics and Business at Brawijaya University, who
have ever used or are still utilizing OVO.

REFERENCES
Abdillah, W., & Hartono, J. (2015). Partial Least Square (PLS): Alternatif
Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) dalam Penelitian Bisnis.
Yogyakarta: C.V. Andi Offset.
Abrahãoa, R. d., 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). Innovation and
Management Review, 221-230.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and

Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Ajzen, I. (2002). Residual Effects of past on Later Behavior: Habituation and

Reasoned Action Perspectives. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
6(2), 107e122.
Akbayrak, B. (2000). A Comparison of Two Data Collecting Methods: Interviews

and Questionnaires. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Egitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18, 1-10.
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, 99-110.
Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Rana, N. P. (2018). Examining Factors

Influencing Jordanian Customers‟ Intentions and Adoption of Internet
Banking: Extending UTAUT2 with risk. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 40 (2018) 125-138.
Aldas-Manzano, J., Lassala-Navarre, C., Ruiz-Mafe, C., & Sanz-Blas, S. (2009).

The Role of Consumer Innovativeness and Perceived Risk in Online
Banking Usage. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 27(1), 53e75.
Amoroso, D.L., Magnier watanabe, R, 2012. Building a Research Model for

Mobile Wallet Consumer Adoption: The Case of Mobiled Suica in Japan.
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 7 (1), 94-110.
111
112
APJII. (2018). Hasil Survei Pengguna Internet 2017. Retrieved from APJII:
https://apjii.or.id/survei2017/kirimlink
Arenas-Gaitán, J., Peral-Peral, B., & Ramón-Jerónimo, M. A. (2015, April).

Elderly and Internet Banking: An Application of UTAUT2. Journal of
Internet Banking and Commerce, 20(1).
Au, Y.A., Kauffman, R.J., 2008. The Economics of Mobile Payments:

Understanding Stakeholder Issues for an Emerging Financial Technology
Application. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 7 (2), 141-164.
Bank Indonesia. 2014. Peraturan Bank Indonesia Nomor: 16/8/PBI/2014 Tentang

Perubahan Atas Peraturan Bank Indonesia Nomor 11/12/PBI/2009
Tentang Uang Elektronik (Electronic Money).
Bank for International Settlemets. 1996. Implications for Central Banks of the
Development of Electronic Money. Basle: Bank for International
Settlements.
Baptista, G., & Oliveira, T. (2017). Why so Serious? Gamification Impact in the
Acceptance of Mobile Banking Services. Internet Research, 27(1), 118-
139.
Bashir, I., & Madhavaiah, C. (2015). Consumer Attitude and Behavioural

Intention Towards Internet Banking Adoption in India. Journal of Indian
Business Research, 7(1), 67-102.
Bougie, R., & Sekaran, U. (2013). Research Methods for Business (6th edition).
John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Celik, H., 2008. What determines Turkish customers' acceptance of internet

banking Int. J. Bank Mark. 26 (5), 353–370.
Childers, T.L., Carr, C.L., Peck, J., Carson, S., 2002. Hedonic and Utilitarian
Motivations for Online Retail Shopping Behavior. J. Retail. 77 (4), 511–
535.
113
Chong, A. Y.-L. (2013). A Two-Staged Sem-Neural Network Approach for

Understanding and Predicting the Determinants of M-Commerce
Adoption. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(4), 1240e1247.
Chopdar, Prasanta Kr., Nikolaos Korfiatis, V.J. Sivakumar, Miltiades 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 (2018) 109-128.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed

Methods Apporaches (4th edition ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dabholkar, P.A. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2002). An Attitudinal Model of Technology-

Based Selfservice: Moderating Effects of Consumer Traits and Situational
Factors. J. Acad. Mark. Sci., 30(3), 184–201.
Davis, F. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease Of Use, And User

Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 319.
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.
Dodds, W.B., Monroe, K.B., Grewal, D., 1991. Effects of Price, Brand, and Store
Information on Buyers. J. Mark. Res. 28 (3), 307–319.
Gan, C., Clemes, M., Limsombunchai, V., Weng, A., 2006. A Logit Analysis of
Electronic Banking in New Zealand. Int. J. Bank Mark. 24 (6), 360–383.
Groß, M. (2015). Exploring the Acceptance of Technology for Mobile Shopping:

An Empirical Investigation Among Smartphone Users. International
Review of Retail Distribution & Consumer Research, 25(3), 215e235.
Hall, J. A. (2011). Accounting Information Systems (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Hew, J.-J., Lee, V.-H., Ooi, K.-B., & Wei, J. (2015). What Catalyses Mobile Apps
Usage Intention: An Empirical Analysis. Industrial Management & Data
Systems, 115(7), 1269e1291.
114
Hoehle, H., Scomavacca, E., Huff, S., (2012). Three Decades of Research on
Consumer Adoption and Utilization of Electronic Banking Channels: A
Literature Analysis. Decision Support Systems 54, 122-132.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.04.010
Hutahaean, J. (2015). Konsep Sistem Informasi. Yogyakarta: Deepublish

Publisher.
Khalifa, M., & Ning Shen, K. (2008). Explaining the Adoption of Transactional
b2c Mobile Commerce. Journal of Enterprise Information Management,
21(2), 110e124.
Kim, B. (2012). The Diffusion of Mobile Data Services and Applications:

Exploring the Role of Habit and Its Antecedents. Telecommunications
Policy, 36(1), 69e81.
Kim, S. C., Yoon, D., & Han, E. K. (2014). Antecedents of Mobile App Usage
Among Smartphone Users. Journal of Marketing Communications, 22(6),
1e18.
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.
Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methology: Methods and Techniques (2nd ed.).

India: New Age International.
Lai, I. K., & Lai, D. C. (2014). User Acceptance of Mobile Commerce: An

Empirical Study in Macau. International Journal of Systems Science,
45(6), 1321e1331.
Leong, L. Y., Ooi, K. B., Chong, A. Y. L., & Lin, B. (2013a). Modelling the
Stimulators of the Behavioral Intention to Use Mobile Entertainment: Does
Gender Really Matter? Computers in Human Behaviour, 29, 2109-2121.
Limayem, M., Hirt, S.G., Cheung, C.M.K., 2007a. How Habit Limits the
Predictive Power of Intentions: The Case of Is Continuance. MIS Q. 31
(4), 705–737.
115
Limayem, M., Hirt, S.G., Cheung, C.M.K., 2007b. How Habit Limits the
Predictive Power of Intentions: The Case of Is Continuance. MIS Q. 31
(4), 705–737.
Lu, H.-P., & Yu-Jen Su, P. (2009). Factors Affecting Purchase Intention on
Mobile Shopping Web Sites. Internet Research, 19(4), 442e458.
Lucas, H. C., & Spitler, V. (1999). Technology Use and Performance: A Field
Study of Broker Workstations. Decision Sciences, 30(2), 291e311.
Macedo, Isabel Maria. (2017). Predicting the Acceptance and Use of Information
and Communication Technology by Older Adults: An Empirical
Examination of the Revised UTAUT2. Computers in Human Behavior 75
(2017) 935-948.
Martins, C., Oliveira, T., & Popovic, 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, 1-13.
Naresh K. Malhotra. (2010). Introduction: Analyzing Accumulated Knowledge

and Influencing Future Research, in Naresh K. Malhotra (ed.). Review of
Marketing Research (Review of Marketing Research, Volume 7) Emerald
Group Publishing Limited, pp.xiii – xxviii.
O'Brien, J. A., & Marakas, G. M. (2011). Management Information Systems (10th

ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Oliveira, T., Faria, M., Thomas, M. A., & Popovi_c, A. (2014). Extending the
Understanding of Mobile Banking Adoption: When UTAUT Meets TTF
and ITM. International Journal of Information Management, 34(5),
689e703.
OVO. (2018). About OVO. Retrieved from OVO: https://www.ovo.id
Reinartz, W., Haenlein, M., & Henseler, J. (2009). An Empirical Comparison of

the Efficacy of Covariance-Based and Variance-Based SEM. International
Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(4), 332e344.
116
Riffai, M.M.M.A., Grant, K., Edgar, D., 2012. Big TAM in Oman: exploring the
promise of on-line banking, its adoption by customers and the challenges
of banking in Oman. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 32 (3), 239–250.
Romney, M. B., & Steinbart, P. J. (2015). Accounting Information Systems (13th

ed.). Pearson.
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2013). Research Methods for Business: A Skill-
Building Approach (6th edition ed.). Wiley.
Savela, T. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Quantitative Methods in

Schoolscape Research. Linguistics and Education (2017),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.09.004
Sharma, S.K., Gaur,. A., Saddikuti, V., Rastogi, A, 2017. Structural Equation
Model (Sem) Neural Network (Nn) Model for Predicting Quality
Determinants of E-Learning Management Systems Behav. Inf. Technol. 36
(10), 1053-1066.
Tarhini, A., El-Masri, M., Ali, M., & Serrano, A. (2016). Extending the Utaut
Model to Understand the Customer's Acceptance and Use of Internet
Banking in Lebanon. Information Technology & People, 29(4), 830-849.
Van der Heijden, H., 2004. User Acceptance of Hedonic Information Systems.
MIS Q. 28 (4), 695–704.
Venkatesh, V. (2012). Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology:

Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 1.
Mis Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003, September).
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View.
MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
Vijayasarathy, L. R. (2004). Predicting Consumer Intentions to Use On-Line

Shopping: The Case for an Augmented Technology Acceptance Model.
Information & Management, 41(6), 747e762.
Wang, H.-Y., & Wang, S.-H. (2010). User Acceptance of Mobile Internet Based
on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology:
117
Investigating the Determinants and Gender Differences. Social Behavior

and Personality: International Journal, 38(3), 415e426.
Weir, J. E., & Jones, C. (2008). Is a „Convenience‟ Sample Useful for Estimating
Immunization Coverage in a Small Population? Papua New Guinea
Medical Journal, 51(3-4), 155-159.
Wikipedia. (2018). Kota Malang. Retrieved from Wikipedia:

https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kota_Malang
Wu, Y.-L., Tao, Y.-H., & Yang, P.-C. (2008). The Use of Unified Theory of
Acceptance and Use of Technology to Confer the Behavioral Model of 3g
Mobile. Journal of Statistics & Management Systems, 11(5), 919–949.
Zhou, T., Lu, Y., & Wang, B. (2010). Integrating TTF and UTAUT to Explain
Mobile Banking User Adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 760-
767.
118
APPENDICIES
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Dear Participant,
I am an undergraduate student in Faculty of Economics and Business,
Department of International Accounting, Brawijaya University. I am conducting
my research in information systems, in the context of intention in using OVO.
This research is for graduation requirement in undergraduate program.
The success of this research depends on you as a participant. Therefore, I
sincerely hope your willingness to participate and fill out the attached
questionnaire.
Thank you for taking your time to assist me in my educational endeavors.
Malang, 14 September 2018
Researcher,
Fatimatul Lail
155020307121028
118
119
A LIST OF QUESTIONS
OVO is one of electronic money taking form of electronic wallet which
allows customers to conduct the transactions (paying bills) via mobile phone or
smartphone.
Section I
Show the level of your agreement to the following statement by crossing
(x) accordingly on each statement, using the given scale. Scale is started from
scale 1 stating Strongly Disagree (SD) up to scale 7 stating Strongly Agree
(SA).
120
Descriptions:
1. SD = Strongly Disagree 5. RA = Rather Agree

2. D = Disagree 6. A = Agree
3. RD = Rather Disagree 7. SA = Strongly Agree
4. N = Neutral
1. Performance Expectancy
No Questions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
SD D RD N RA A SA
1. I find OVO is useful in my daily life
2. Using OVO increases my productivity
3. Using OVO increases my chances of

achieving tasks that are important to
me
2. Effort Expectancy
SD D RD N RA A SA
1. My interaction with OVO is clear and
understandable
2. It is easy for me to become skillful at
using OVO
3. I find OVO easy to use
4. Learning how to use OVO is easy for

me
121
3. Social Influence
SD D RD N RA A SA
1. People who are important to me think
that I should use OVO
2. People who influence my behavior
think that I should use OVO
3. People whose opinions that I value
prefer that I use OVO
4. Price Value
SD D RD N RA A SA
1. OVO is reasonably priced
2. OVO is good value for the money
3. At the current price, OVO provides

good value
5. Hedonic Motivation
SD D RD N RA A SA
1. Using OVO is fun
2. Using OVO is very entertaining
4. Using OVO is delightful

122
6. Habit
SD D RD N RA A SA
1. Using OVO has become a habit for me
2. I am addicted to use OVO
3. I must use OVO
4. Using OVO has become natural for

me
7. Behavioral Intention
SD D RD N RA A SA
1. I intend to use OVO in the future
2. I will always try to use OVO in my

daily life
3. I plan to use OVO in future
4. I predict I would use OVO in the

future
8. Use Behaviour
SD D RD N RA A SA
1. In the past 3 months, I have used OVO
in order to purchase products
in order to shop for products from
different merchants
to make personal purchase
123
Section II – Respondent Characteristics

Please provide your information by crossing (X) on the appropriate box or filling
in the blank.
1. Age:
 < 18
 18-20
 21-23
 > 23
2. Semester:
 I  V
 II  VI
 III  VII
 IV  VIII
 Semester other than above, as follows__________
3. Gender:
Male Female
4. Have you ever used OVO?

Yes No
5. How long have you been using OVO?

< < 1 year 3-4 years
1-2 years > 4 years
6. How many times do you use OVO in a month?
< < 3 times 6-8 times
3-5 times > 8 times
KUESIONER PENELITIAN
Kepada
Yth. Bapak/Ibu/Saudara(i)
Di Tempat
Saya adalah Mahasiswi Program Strata Satu (S1) Jurusan Akuntansi

Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas Brawijaya yang saat ini sedang
melakukan penelitian dalam bidang Sistem Informasi dalam konteks minat
penggunaan OVO, yang merupakan salah satu uang elektronik yang berbentuk
dompet elektronik . Penelitian ini merupakan salah satu syarat untuk kelulusan
jenjang pendidikan Strata Satu (S1).
Peneliti sangat menjaga privasi individu. Data yang diolah dalam penelitian
ini tidak akan menunjukkan identitas dari individu yang bersangkutan.
Bapak/Ibu/Saudara(i) adalah responden yang saya pilih menjadi sampel penelitian
saya. Semua jawaban Bapak/Ibu/Saudara(i) pada kuesioner penelitian ini adalah
persepsi Bapak/Ibu/Saudara(i).
Kesuksesan penelitian ini sangat bergantung pada Bapak/Ibu/Saudara/i
sebagai partisipan. Untuk itu saya sangat berharap kerelaan Bapak/Ibu/Saudara(i)
untuk berpartisipasi dan mengisi kuesioner yang saya lampirkan. Atas bantuan
dan kesediaan Bapak/Ibu/Saudara(i) dalam mengisi kuesioner ini saya ucapkan
terima kasih.
Malang, 14 September 2018
Peneliti,
Fatimatul Lail
155020307121028
124
125
DAFTAR PERTANYAAN
OVO merupakan salah satu uang elektronik yang berbentuk dompet
elektronik yang memungkinkan pengguna untuk melakukan transaksi
mengecek saldo, membayar tagihan, dan lain-lain melalui ponsel atau
smartphone.
Bagian I
Tunjukkan tingkat persetujuan Bapak/Ibu/Saudara(i) terhadap pernyataan
berikut dengan memberi tanda silang (x) yang sesuai pada masing-masing
pernyataan, dengan menggunakan skala yang diberikan. Skala dimulai dari skala 1
yang menyatakan bahwa Sangat Tidak Setuju (STS) hingga skala 7 yang
menyatakan bahwa Sangat Setuju (SS).

126
Keterangan:
1. STS = Sangat Tidak Setuju 5. AS = Agak Setuju

2. TS = Tidak Setuju 6. S = Setuju
3. ATS = Agak Tidak Setuju 7. SS = Sangat Setuju
4. N = Netral
ITEM PERTANYAAN:
1. Ekspektasi Kinerja
No Pertanyaan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
STS TS ATS N AS S SS
1. Saya merasa bahwa OVO sangat
bermanfaat dalam kehidupan sehari-
hari saya
2. Menggunakan OVO meningkatkan
produktivitas saya
3. Menggunakan OVO meningkatkan
peluang saya untuk mencapai transaksi
pembelian yang penting bagi saya
2. Ekspektasi Usaha
1. Menurut saya, interaksi saya dengan
OVO sangat jelas dan dapat dimengerti
2. Mudah bagi saya untuk menjadi
terampil dalam menggunakan OVO
3. Saya merasa bahwa OVO mudah
untuk digunakan
4. Mempelajari penggunaan OVO adalah
suatu hal yang mudah bagi saya
3. Pengaruh Sosial
1. Orang-orang yang penting bagi saya
berpikir bahwa saya perlu
menggunakan OVO
127
2. Orang-orang yang memiliki pengaruh

disekitar saya berpikir bahwa saya
perlu menggunakan OVO
3. Orang-orang yang pendapatnya saya
hargai lebih memilih saya untuk
menggunakan OVO
4. Orang-orang yang penting bagi saya
berpikir bahwa saya tidak perlu
menggunakan OVO
4. Kondisi yang Memfasilitasi
1. Saya memiliki sumber daya yang
diperlukan untuk menggunakan OVO
2. Saya memiliki pengetahuan yang
diperlukan untuk menggunakan OVO
3. Menurut saya, OVO cocok dengan
teknologi lain yang saya gunakan
4. Saya bisa mendapatkan bantuan dari
orang lain saat saya mengalami
kesulitan menggunakan OVO
5. Nilai Harga
1. Biaya layanan OVO cukup terjangkau
2. OVO memberikan layanan yang layak

dan sepadan untuk biaya yang
dibayarkan
3. Dengan biaya yang ditawarkan saat
ini, OVO menyediakan layanan yang
baik
128
6. Motivasi Hedonis
1. Menggunakan OVO menyenangkan
2. Menggunakan OVO menegangkan
3. Menggunakan OVO sangat menghibur
4. Menggunakan OVO sangat menarik
7. Kebiasaan
1. Menggunakan OVO telah menjadi
kebiasaan bagi saya
2. Saya ketagihan menggunakan OVO
3. Saya harus menggunakan OVO
4. Menggunakan OVO telah menjadi hal

yang wajar bagi saya
8. Minat
1. Saya berniat untuk menggunakan
OVO di masa depan
2. Saya akan selalu mencoba
menggunakan OVO dalam kehidupan
keseharian saya
3. Saya berencana akan menggunakan
OVO di masa depan
4. Saya memprediksi saya akan
menggunakan OVO di masa depan
129
9. Perilaku Penggunaan
SD D RD N RA A SA
1. Dalam 3 bulan terakhir, saya
menggunakan OVO untuk membeli
suatu produk
menggunakan OVO untuk membeli
produk di pedagang/toko yang berbeda
menggunakan OVO untuk pembelian
pribadi
130
Bagian II
Karateristik Responden
Mohon diisi semua pertanyaan dibawah ini dengan memberi tanda (x) pada
jawaban yang paling sesuai.
1. Umur:
 < 18
 18-20
 21-23
 > 23
2. Semester:
 I  V
 II  VI
 III  VII
 IV  VIII
 Semester selain diatas, sebutkan__________
3. Jenis Kelamin:
Laki-laki Perempuan
4. Apakah saudara/i pernah menggunakan OVO?

Ya Tidak
5. Berapa lama anda menggunakan OVO?

< < 1 tahun 3-4 tahun
1-2 tahun > 4 tahun
6. Berapa kali anda menggunakan OVO dalam sebulan?
< < 3 kali dalam sebulan 6-8 kali dalam sebulan
3-5 kali dalam sebulan > 8 kali dalam sebulan

Feb Fatimatul Lail

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Feb Fatimatul Lail

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Feb Fatimatul Lail

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL’S BEHAVIORAL INTENTION AND

USE BEHAVIOR IN USING OVO BASED ON UTAUT 2

Submitted as One of Requirements to Achieve Bachelor Degree of Accounting

INTERNATIONAL UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM IN ACCOUNTING

Name : Fatimatul Lail

Date of Birth : Gresik, 28 Mei 1997

Address : Jalan Bunga Merak no.55, Malang, 65141

Email Address : fatimatullail28@gmail.com

Phone Number : +62 82139427809

II. Professional Experience and Organizations

entitled “THE ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL‟S BEHAVIORAL INTENTION

of Bachelor in Economics majoring in Accounting at Faculty of Economics and

Business, Brawijaya University.

deliver my sincere appreciation and gratitude to the following parties:

International Accounting Department, who has supported the author to

immediately resolve this minor thesis;

contributes to the completion of this minor thesis;

Department; who gives continuous support to all of the accounting students;

6. Drs. Nurkholis, M.Bus.(Acc)., Ak., Ph.D., as the Dean of Economics and

ability and knowledge in the field of economics;

thesis and the study of the author;

8. I certainly could not accomplish without my family‟s unconditional and

countless support, especially my parents, Muh. Luthfi and Lis Shofawati, as

while finishing this last challenging semester.

Andrias, Zakhruvia, Gabrillah, Tandia, Neni, Niken, Yusril, Mukhson, Yusron,

10. All of my special friends in Himpunan Mahasiswa Jurusan Akuntansi for

providing me with unfailing support and continuous encouragement throughout

attention and encouragement given to me during my study here.

Therefore, constructive criticsm and suggestion are much to improve our

much help for many people. Amen.

Malang, January 13th 2018

APPROVAL PAGE ................................................................................................. i

No. List of Tables Page

2.1 The Four Core Determinants of UTAUT ..................................................26

4.2 Composition of Respondents based on Age...............................................69

No List of Figures Page

3.1 Construction Indicators............................................................................. 54

4.2 The Composition of Respondents based on Gender................................. 68

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................... 118

By: Fatimatul Lail

Supervisor: Dr. Zaki Baridwan, Ak., CA., CPA., CLI

Keywords: E-money, E-wallet, Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy,

Oleh: Fatimatul Lail

Pembimbing: Dr. Zaki Baridwan, Ak., CA., CPA., CLI

1.1 Research Background

Nowadays, technology has been rapidly developing and playing an

important role in people‟s life. The growth of Information is very significant

aspects. Information and communication technology provides tremendous

benefits by changing the way people live, communicate, work and do

transaction. This phenomenon is encouraged by the existance of Internet as

Internet Indonesia) stating that if the number of internet users in Indonesia

internet) . In the light of the existence of Internet, people manage everything

easily, including financial transaction.

Accounting information system is defined as a model and human

resource in an organization which is responsible to prepare financial

information. In one accounting cycle, a revenue cycle acts as a group of

business activity and repeatedly processes related information by serving

goods and services to the customers and by collecting cash as a payment

entry, shipping, billing and accounts receivable, and cash collection.