Exploring Platform Trust, Borrowing Intention, and Actual Use of PayLater Services in Indonesia and Malaysia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores how system-based and cognitive-based factors affect platform trust and its role in the actual use of PayLater services (buy now, pay later or BNPL) in Indonesia and Malaysia. PayLater, a fintech innovation, provides fast and convenient payment options through online platforms. By incorporating platform trust into the technology acceptance model (TAM), the research investigates whether borrowing intention acts as a mediator between platform trust and actual usage. Utilizing a quantitative approach with purposive sampling, data were gathered from 106 respondents in Indonesia and 169 in Malaysia, with 62 and 85 respondents meeting the criteria, respectively. Partial least squares (PLS) analysis indicates notable differences in how Indonesian and Malaysian users perceive platform trust, while the effect of platform trust on borrowing intention remains consistent across both nations. Borrowing intention emerges as a crucial factor influencing the actual use of PayLater services. The results offer important insights into the adoption of fintech services in emerging markets, highlighting the significance of platform trust in shaping user behavior. This research provides practical suggestions for fintech providers to improve platform trust and user engagement in cross-country scenarios.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".