MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414554009 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18100546

Unveiling the Future of FinTech: Exploring the Behavioral Intentions Behind FinTech Adoption

2025· article· en· W4414554009 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Attila Kurucz, Tamás Vinkóczi, Borbála Tamás, Ewelina Idziak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSzéchenyi István Egyetem
KeywordsTechnology acceptance modelSurvey data collectionSocial influenceInformation technologyBusiness modelFinTech

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In addition to the technological aspects of FinTech solutions, it is important to consider user willingness, particularly among the digitally savvy Generation Z. We conducted a survey in Hungary and Poland to gather information on young people’s use of FinTech applications and their attitudes towards FinTech services. In our research, we built on the already known technology adoption model (UTAUT) and combined it with an attitudinal study. To determine the factors that influence the propensity to use these services, we developed a hypothetical model and tested it with the results of the first round of the survey (n = 117). CB-SEM was used to investigate the relationship between attitudes, social influence, and intention to use behavior. The paper presents the significant relationship characteristics, model structure, and potential business applications of the results.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital FinanceFrench-language works237,207