Expert Answer:Consumer Acceptance Of Mobile Payment Across Time


Solved by verified expert:Please write a 1.5 – 2 pages literature review with 3 research papers. The requirement list and research papers are attached.My research question : What payment method do people prefer, electronic payment or traditional payment?Thank you sooo much!!


Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Expert Answer:Consumer Acceptance Of Mobile Payment Across Time
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay



Unformatted Attachment Preview

Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 9 (2010) 209–216
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications
journal homepage:
Understanding consumer acceptance of mobile payment services: An
empirical analysis
Paul Gerhardt Schierz a,1, Oliver Schilke b,*, Bernd W. Wirtz c,2
The Boston Consulting Group, Ludwigstrasse 21, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Stanford University, Institute for Research in the Social Sciences, 450 Serra Mall – Building 370, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
German University of Administrative Sciences Speyer, Institute for Information and Communication Management, Freiherr-vom-Stein-Strasse 2, D-67346 Speyer, Germany
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 31 January 2009
Received in revised form 5 June 2009
Accepted 26 July 2009
Available online 3 August 2009
Mobile payment
Consumer mobility
Technology acceptance model (TAM)
Perceived usefulness
Perceived ease of use
Intention to use
Perceived risk
Subjective norm
Structural equation modeling
a b s t r a c t
Mobile technology has become increasingly common in today’s everyday life. However, mobile payment
is surprisingly not among the frequently used mobile services, although technologically advanced solutions exist. Apparently, there is still a lack of acceptance of mobile payment services among consumers.
The conceptual model developed and tested in this research thus focuses on factors determining consumers’ acceptance of mobile payment services. The empirical results show particularly strong support for
the effects of compatibility, individual mobility, and subjective norm. Our study offers several implications for managers in regards to marketing mobile payment solutions to increase consumers’ intention
to use these services.
Ó 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Driven by the increasing mobility of today’s modern society, the
number of mobile phone accounts has sharply increased in recent
years and the mobile telephony industry has grown significantly.
In line with these developments, mobile services have increasingly
become a part of everyday life (Hwang et al. 2007). In particular,
some growth forecasts for mobile payment services have been very
positive. The management consulting firm Arthur D. Little, for
example, predicted a growth of mobile payment services from
US$11.7 Billion in 2005 to US$37.1 Billion in 2008 (Arthur D. Little
2004). This number would have accounted for about 8% of the total
mobile services market in 2006. Despite these encouraging forecasts, however, the reality looks quite different, and the situation
is often disappointing for those firms offering mobile payment services. In 2008, only 1% of all cellular users had used mobile payment services (Gartner Group 2009). Thus, the actual market
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 650 736 1137; fax: +1 650 725 6471.
E-mail addresses: (P.G. Schierz), (O.
Schilke), (B.W. Wirtz).
Tel.: +49 (0) 89 2317 4597.
Tel.: +49 (0) 6232 654 296.
1567-4223/$ – see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
penetration of mobile payment services strongly deviates from
previous predictions.
This observation leads to the question of why consumers have
not adopted mobile payment services. Prior research has provided
a rather limited understanding of the key drivers in consumer
acceptance of mobile payment services. A comprehensive study
about such factors offers the potential to derive important managerial implications regarding how mobile payment services could
be marketed more effectively, thus leading to greater consumer
acceptance. This is important because the number of firms already
offering, or interested in, adopting mobile payment options has
steadily increased, and guidance is needed on how managers can
effectively boost the number of customers who choose this form
of payment as an alternative to more traditional payment services.
Given the high practical relevance and dearth of prior empirical
work, the current research aims to develop and test an integrative
model of factors determining consumers’ acceptance of mobile
payment services. For this purpose, we collected data from a representative sample of 1447 respondents and used the structural
equation modeling software EQS to test a theory-based research
model of mobile payment acceptance. Our results reveal major
drivers of consumers’ intention to use mobile payment services.
Among the most important drivers are perceived compatibility
P.G. Schierz et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 9 (2010) 209–216
(the degree to which mobile payment is reconcilable with existing
values, behavioral patterns, and experiences), individual mobility
(the degree to which an individual pursues a mobile lifestyle),
and subjective norm (the degree to which the social environment
perceives mobile payment as desirable).
This article has two main contributions. From a conceptual
viewpoint, we develop a model that is based on various theoretical fields which are relevant to the consumer motives for using
mobile payment solutions. This allows us to draw a broader
and more holistic picture of the drivers of consumer acceptance
of mobile payment services compared to previous research. From
an empirical viewpoint, we make a contribution by testing this
model with a large sample, which enables us to conduct several
stability tests in order to increase confidence in the findings. Providing reliable, confirmatory evidence regarding the relevance of
various acceptance factors is particularly important since prior research on mobile payment has primarily been qualitative in
The outline of the current article is as follows: First, we define
the key terms used in our research and elaborate on the theoretical basis—the technology acceptance model (TAM), which provides the general structure for our research model. Subsequently,
we review previous work on mobile payment acceptance. Building
on theory and extant knowledge about the phenomenon of consumer acceptance, we present our hypotheses, specifying a set of
factors that are proposed to directly or indirectly determine consumers’ intention to use mobile payment solutions. In the section
on methods, we describe the survey and discuss the validity and
reliability of the empirical data. We then present our substantive
results and stability checks. The paper closes with a summary of
the key findings and a discussion of the implications of the
2.2. Theoretical background
2. Conceptual foundations
In the IT/IS literature, a variety of models have been advanced to
explain innovation usage (Venkatesh et al. 2003). Among them, the
technology acceptance model (TAM), proposed by Davis (1989), has
evolved as the most popular (Chau and Hu 2001). It can be considered the most influential extension of the theory of reasoned action
(TRA) and the theory of planned behavior (TPB), replacing variables
related to attitude and behavioral control with technology acceptance measures (Bagozzi 2007).
The benefits of TAM include reliable instruments with excellent
measurement properties, conciseness, and empirical soundness
(Pavlou 2003). Moreover, TAM compares favorably with alternative
acceptance models in explaining a substantial proportion of the variance in usage intentions (Venkatesh 1999). TAM also applies to a
wide range of research questions, including wireless LAN usage
(Yoon and Kim 2007), adoption of internet banking (Lee 2009),
and attitude toward self-service solutions (Dabholkar and Bagozzi
2002). Therefore, even if TAM was originally intended to predict
IT system use in the workplace, the TAM variables can also be employed to predict consumer acceptance in a variety of settings.
Although very useful in explaining behavioral intention, we posit that certain extensions to the model are required to explain the
intention to use mobile payment services. It has been suggested
that the TAM is too parsimonious and should be expanded by factors particularly relevant to the specific technology under investigation (Venkatesh and Davis 2000). Also, integrating variables from
related theoretical perspectives can provide a better understanding
of consumer acceptance (Nysveen et al. 2005). Thus, we regard the
TAM as a starting point of our research and extend it with additional constructs important to mobile payment acceptance. In
doing so, we heed the call for additional research that broadens
and deepens TAM by introducing new variables, as well as explaining and reconceptualizing existing variables in the model (Bagozzi
2.1. Terminology
2.3. Literature review
Mobile payment services can be considered a special form of the
electronic handling of payments. Looking at existing definitions,
we find several distinct commonalities and differences. Most conceptualizations emphasize the mobile device as the key characteristic distinguishing mobile payments from other forms of payment.
Some authors focus on cell phones (e.g., Henkel 2002), while others
include all mobile communication devices (e.g., Zmijewska and
Lawrence 2006). Regarding the function of mobile payments, all
definitions refer to the transfer of monetary value. Differences
can be found when it comes to the phases of the payment process
that are considered to be part of the mobile payment. Henkel
(2002), for example, refers to the authorization and initiation of
the payment process in his definition, and Dahlberg et al. (2008)
also include this realization, i.e. the execution of the payment, in
their definition. In the current study, we adopt a broad view of
mobile payment services and examine all payments for goods,
services, and bills authorized, initiated, or realized with a mobile
device. However, since acceptance drivers in a B2B context may
differ from consumer acceptance, we focus on consumers as the
users of mobile payment services.
The second key term used in this research is consumer acceptance, which we define as the relatively enduring cognitive and
affective perceptual orientation of an individual. Similar to
previous work, we use the construct of intention to use as a proxy
for consumer acceptance (Mathieson 1991; Venkatesh and Davis
2000). This is a particularly suitable concept since empirical findings underscore the idea that intention to use is an appropriate
predictor of later usage (Sheppard et al. 1988).
Reviewing the relevant literature, we find that only a rudimentary understanding exists about the drivers of mobile payment
acceptance. There appear to be three groups of researchers that have
published empirical work on this topic. In a survey-based study,
Linck et al. (2006) asked consumers which characteristics of mobile
payment applications they perceive as particularly relevant. The
authors present an analysis of frequencies, indicating that consumers prefer simple, secure, and inexpensive payment services.
The work by Zmijewska, Lawrence, and Steele aims to develop a
user-orientated taxonomy of mobile payment systems (Zmijewska
and Lawrence 2006; Zmijewska et al. 2004a,b). They classify existing mobile payment systems, evaluating those systems based on a
set of consumer-oriented criteria. Relevant classification dimensions include factors such as simplicity, security, and costs. An
examination of the relative importance of those dimensions, however, was not included.
The work by Dahlberg, Mallat, and Öörni also needs to be noted
(Dahlberg et al. 2003; Mallat 2004). Based on group interviews,
they analyzed factors contributing to the acceptance of mobile
payment systems. Their empirical study included 61 consumers
within various age groups and from different professional backgrounds. The participants’ comments during open discussion
rounds were subsequently coded by the researchers, yielding three
relevant factors related to mobile payment acceptance: perceived
ease of use, perceived usefulness, and trust. The results were interpreted as confirming the general applicability of the technology
acceptance model in the context of mobile payment services. However, given the nature of the data, no confirmatory test of this prop-
P.G. Schierz et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 9 (2010) 209–216
osition was employed. Therefore, the authors call for future research verifying their exploratory findings (Dahlberg et al. 2003).
These studies hint at a set of potentially relevant factors driving
consumer acceptance of mobile payment solutions. At the same
time, it is obvious that there is a research gap in regards to a lack
of hypothesis-testing studies on mobile payment acceptance and
in regards to developing an understanding of the relative importance and relationships of different acceptance drivers. This conclusion is in line with the literature review by Dahlberg et al.
(2008, p. 179), who state: ‘‘Yet, we believe that more theory based
empirical research is needed to enhance the current understanding
of the mobile payment services markets. (. . .) to improve the quality and relevance of mobile payment research, we also recommend
that researchers collect more empirical data backed by guiding
theories (. . .).”
3. Hypotheses
ment process steps, graphic display, and help functions (Pagani and
Schipani 2005). Consequently, we incorporate perceived ease of use
of mobile payment services in our consumer acceptance model. It
is important to note that, especially for non-users, it is the perception of ease of use rather than actual system characteristics which
underlie this construct (Venkatesh and Davis 1996).
H3: There is a positive relationship between the perceived ease
of use of mobile payment services and the attitude towards
using mobile payment services.
Further, we follow prior research in proposing that the easier
and more intuitive mobile payment services are perceived to be,
the more positive the assessment of their usefulness (Venkatesh
et al. 2003). The implied relationship is reflected by our fourth
H4: There is a positive relationship between perceived ease of
use of mobile payment services and perceived usefulness of
mobile payment services.
Following the lead of Venkatesh and Davis (2000), we start our
hypotheses section with the ‘‘core TAM” and incorporate additional
constructs to extend the original theory. We begin by discussing
eight hypotheses that are related to the technology itself. Subsequently, we will introduce a factor associated with the social context as well as a factor pertaining to an individual user
The main dependent variable in studies building on the TAM is
intention to use (van der Heijden 2003; Venkatesh et al. 2003), defined as the likelihood that an individual will use a technology.
According to the TAM, the main antecedent—and key mediator of
the influence of other variables on intention to use—is a person’s
attitude towards using a technology (Davis 1989; Davis et al.
1989), the degree to which using a technology is positively or negatively valued by an individual. A positive relationship between the
two constructs—intention to use and attitude towards using a
technology—has been found in a number of previous studies (Yang
and Yoo 2004). We adopt this structure in our research model and
hypothesize that attitude towards using mobile payment services
serves as a determinant of the intention to use mobile payment
Besides perceived benefits (i.e., perceived usefulness and ease of
use), innovations usually also come with risks (Cho 2004). As such,
the perceived risk associated with a product or service has gained
significance in consumer research on innovations (Lim 2003;
Mitchell 1999). In the context of electronic services, security risk,
conceptualized as the likelihood of privacy invasion, has been
found to be a particularly critical concern among consumers (Lwin
et al. 2007). First, many people have not had any previous experience with new electronic services such as mobile payment systems
(Bauer et al. 2005a). Second, services (as opposed to tangible products) are inherently more difficult to evaluate and are thus perceived as more risky (Gefen et al. 2003; Mitchell 1999). Finally,
making a mobile payment is often associated with a relatively high
loss potential—related to privacy, personal data, and the transaction itself (Bauer et al. 2005b)—further increasing the perceived
risk of mobile payment services. Similar to previous research
(Cho 2004), we thus propose a positive link between perceived
security (i.e., low perceived risk) and the attitude towards using
mobile payment services.
H1: There is a positive relationship between the attitude
towards using mobile payment services and the intention to
use mobile payment services.
H5: There is a positive relationship between perceived security
of mobile payment services and the attitude towards using
mobile payment services.
One of the main reasons for the slow diffusion of mobile applications in general and mobile payment in particular could be a failure in communicating a clear benefit to potential users. According
to diffusion theory, users are only willing to accept innovations if
those innovations provide a unique advantage compared to existing solutions (Rogers 1995). In the context of TAM, this view is reflected by the perceived usefulness construct. The TAM proposes
that perceived usefulness is a central antecedent to the attitude towards using a technology (Davis 1989). Hence:
We further extend the original TAM by including the perceived
compatibility of mobile payment services as an additional factor.
In their comprehensive meta-analysis, Tornatzky and Klein
(1982) find perceived compatibility to be a crucial innovation characteristic driving consumer acceptance. Thus, it can be assumed
that perceived compatibility is a useful extension of TAM, increasing its predictive power. Perceived compatibility encompasses the
reconcilability of an innovation with existing values, behavioral
patterns, and experiences. Extant research shows positive effects
of perceived compatibility on both the attitude toward using a
technology and perceived usefulness (Hardgrave et al. 2003). Further, there is reason to believe that perceived compatibility has a
direct impact on the intention to use a technology (Mallat et al.
2006). In view of these findings, we hypothesize the following:
H2: There is a positive relationship between the perceived usefulness of mobile payment services and the attitude towards
using mobile payment services.
Given the technical limitations of mobile devices, ease of use
becomes an imminent acceptance driver of mobile applications
(Venkatesh 2000). This is especially true for mobile payment services, which compete with established payment solutions and thus
need to provide benefits when it comes to ease of use. Important
aspects related to mobile payment services ease of use include,
for example, clear symbols and function keys, few and simple pay-
H6: There is a positive relationship between the perceived compatibility of mobile payment services and the perceived usefulness of mobile payment services.
H7: There is a positive relationship between the perceived compatibility of mobile payment services and the attitude towards
using mobile payment services.
P.G. Schierz et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 9 (2010) 209–216
H8: There is a positive relationship between the perceived compatibility of mobile payment services and the intention to use
mobile payment services.
When assessing the acceptance of technological innovations,
the social context of the decision maker should not be neglected.
If the social context is in favor of using a technology, this plays
an important role in the …
Purchase answer to see full

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Order your essay today and save 30% with the discount code ESSAYSHELP