MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390050976 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17010006

What Accelerates the Choice of Mobile Banking for Digital Banks in Indonesia?

2023· article· en· W4390050976 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Toto Edrinal Sebayang, Dedi Budiman Hakim, Toni Bakhtiar, Dikky Indrawan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnbankedMobile bankingBusinessReputationMobile paymentMarketingRisk perceptionPopulationCashFinancial servicesInternet privacyPaymentFinanceFinancial inclusionMedicineComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent COVID-19 pandemic has led to changes in business, technology, and social interactions, creating a new normal that has important implications for the role of technology, including mobile banking services that offer safer and more hygienic payment methods than cash. Innovations in mobile banking services have been considered to have the ability to provide unbanked customers with better access in growing markets such as Indonesia, which still has a huge unbanked population of 100 million people. This study evaluates the driving factors of mobile banking adoption by 1441 banking customers among major digital banks in Indonesia. Data collected between September 2022 and March 2023 were examined using PLS-SEM with Smart PLS 4.0.9.6. This study extends the Decomposed Theory of Planned Behavior (DTPB) framework by including Disease Risk, Trust, Firm Reputation, Perceived Risk, Performance Risk, Privacy Risk, Financial Risk, Psychological Risk, Time Risk, and Disease Risk. The findings show that Trust, Attitude, Perceived Behavior Control, Perceived Risk, Psychological Risk, and Disease Risk play a significant role in respondents’ intention to adopt mobile banking services. In contrast, Subjective Norm, Firm Reputation, Performance Risk, Privacy Risk, Financial Risk, and Time Risk had lower impacts. The findings suggest that users choose mobile banking over cash as a safety measure. As a result, banks must prioritize their mobile banking innovations tailored to personalized user experience to deepen engagement, with easy-to-use navigation that fits the lifestyles, values, and needs of banking customers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207