You are on page 1of 16

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-4503.htm

MIP
30,4 Mobile banking adoption
of the youth market
Perceptions and intentions
444
Ulun Akturan
Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Galatasaray University,
Received 22 July 2011
Accepted 18 January 2012 Istanbul, Turkey, and
Nuray Tezcan
Faculty of Management, Halic University, Istanbul, Turkey

Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to investigate consumers’ mobile banking adoption through an integration
of the technology acceptance model (TAM) with work on perceived benefits and perceived risks.
Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from 435 university students who were
non-users but future prospects, and analyzed by structural equation modeling (SEM).
Findings – It was found that perceived usefulness, perceived social risk, perceived performance risk
and perceived benefit directly affect attitudes towards mobile banking, and that attitude is the major
determinant of mobile banking adoption intention. In addition, no direct relationship between
perceived usefulness and intention to use, perceived ease of use and attitude, financial risk, time risk,
security/privacy risk and attitude was detected.
Research limitations/implications – This study reflects the perceptions of non-users and
university students – potential future prospects – in an emerging country. The main theoretical
contribution of this research is the development of a risk-benefit model by extending TAM.
Practical implications – Banks should rely on increasing the benefit perceptions of mobile
banking. Simultaneously, decreases in social and performance risk should be promoted strongly.
Originality/value – In the study, the adoption intention of mobile banking is tested by integrating
TAM with perceived benefits and perceived risks – social risk, performance risk, financial risk, time
risk, security risk and privacy risk.
Keywords Mobile banking, Perceived benefit, Perceived risks, Technology acceptance model,
Youth market, Mobile technologies, Banking, Consumer attitudes
Paper type Research paper

Developments in information technology have an enormous effect on the banking


sector, creating continually ever more flexible payment methods and user-friendly
banking services. Since the 1980s major technology-enhanced products and services
from automated teller machines (ATMs) to e-banking have become available
everywhere 24/7 (Liao and Cheung, 2002). More than ten years ago it was clearly
recognized that the internet promised nothing less than a revolution in retail banking,
Business Week categorically stating that “banking is essential to a modern economy,
Marketing Intelligence & Planning banks are not” (Tan and Teo, 2000, p. 3).
Vol. 30 No. 4, 2012
pp. 444-459
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0263-4503
The authors would like to thank to Galatasaray University Scientific Research Projects
DOI 10.1108/02634501211231928 Commission for the support provided (Research Project No. 09.102.009).
Today mobile banking applications are evolving as a new retail channel for banks. Mobile banking
Mobile banking is a focal point of growth strategies for both the banking and mobile adoption
carrier industries (Goswami and Raghavendran, 2009). Banks, through mobile banking
applications, provide a combination of payments, banking, real-time two-way data
transmission, and ubiquitous access to financial information and services (Jacob,
2007). It is now taken for granted that the mobile phone as a channel for service
consumption offers enormous potential in banking (Laukkanen and Lauronen, 2005). 445
Previous studies indicate the factors contributing to the adoption of mobile banking
include convenience, access to the service regardless of time and place, privacy and
savings in time and effort (Laukkanen, 2007). Therefore, consumers assume and expect
that through a phone they can readily attain fast, convenient and compatible service on
demand.
However, despite its advantages, the use of mobile banking has not spread in fact as
was expected (Kim et al., 2009; Laukkanen, 2007; Laforet and Li, 2005). The internet is
still the leading channel in electronic banking. Cortinas et al. (2010) found that despite
using different channels to do their banking, customers tend to use one channel.
This research aims to investigate the impact of perceived risks and benefits on
consumers’ mobile banking adoption in the context of the technology acceptance model
(TAM).

Conceptual background
Mobile banking is defined as “a channel whereby the consumer interacts with a bank
via a mobile device, such as a mobile phone or personal digital assistant. In that sense
it can be seen as a subset of electronic banking and an extension of internet banking
with its own unique characteristics” (Laukkanen and Passanen, 2008, p. 87).
In the literature, there are several recent studies focused on mobile banking
(Laukkanen and Kiviniemi, 2010; Koenig-Lewis et al., 2010; Cruz et al., 2010; Püschel
et al., 2010; Riquelme and Rios, 2010; Kim et al., 2009; Laforet and Li, 2005; Laukkanen
and Lauronen, 2005; Luarn and Lin, 2005; Pousttchi and Schurig, 2004; Brown et al.,
2003; Lee et al., 2003).
Laukkanen and Kiviniemi (2010) examined the effects of information and guidance
offered by a bank on five adoption barriers and found that the information and
guidance offered by a bank has the most significant effect on perceived functional
usability of the innovation and they play an important role in increasing the positive
image associated with the innovation.
Koenig-Lewis et al. (2010) found that that compatibility, perceived usefulness, and
risk are significant indicators for the adoption of mobile banking services.
Compatibility is an important antecedent for perceived ease of use, perceived
usefulness and credibility. Moreover, trust and credibility are crucial to reduce the
overall perceived risk of mobile banking.
Cruz et al. (2010) investigated the perceived obstacles to the adoption of mobile
banking services and found that that the majority of respondents do not use any kind
of mobile banking service and the reasons behind not using mobile banking were
perception of cost, risk, low perceived relative advantage and complexity.
Riquelme and Rios (2010) investigated the factors affecting the adoption of mobile
banking among current users of internet banking and demonstrated that perceptions of
MIP relative advantage of the mobile device, perception of risk, social norms, ease of use
30,4 and usefulness of the device for banking purposes.
Kim et al. (2009) aimed to research the mechanisms associated with the initial
formation of people’s trust in mobile banking, and their intention to use the service.
With this goal in mind they have tested four types of trust-inducing forces:
institutional offering (structural assurances), cognition (perceived benefits), personality
446 (personal propensity) and firm characteristics (firm reputation). They discovered that
three variables (relative benefits, propensity to trust and structural assurances) have a
significant effect on initial trust in mobile banking. However, the impact of reputation
as a firm characteristic on mobile banking adoption was not supported.
Laforet and Li (2005) investigated consumers’ attitudes towards online and mobile
banking in China. They concluded that security was the most important factor that
motivated Chinese consumer adoption of online banking. While the main barriers to
online banking were found to be the perception of risks, low computer and
technological skills and Chinese traditional cash-carry banking culture, the barriers to
mobile banking adoption were different, in the main a lack of awareness and
understanding of the benefits provided by mobile banking.
Luarn and Lin (2005) researched the applicability of the technology acceptance
model (TAM) in a mobile banking context by adding one trust-based construct
(i.e. perceived credibility) and two resource-based constructs (i.e. perceived self-efficacy
and perceived financial cost ) to the TAM, and demonstrated that their extended TAM
had a higher ability to predict and explain behavioral intention to use an information
system.
Brown et al. (2003) examined the factors that influence the adoption of mobile
banking in South Africa on the basis of innovation diffusion theory, banking needs,
perceived risk internet experience, subjective norm, and self efficacy. They concluded
that relative advantage, trial periods, and consumer banking needs, along with
perceived risk, have a major negative influence on the adoption of mobile banking.
Lee et al. (2003) conducted a qualitative close-up study to examine and understand
consumers’ behavior and motivation towards mobile banking, focusing on both the
innovative attributes and consumers’ perceived risk concerns.
This study aims to investigate the factors affecting mobile banking adoption in an
emerging country. Therefore, we test the adoption intention of mobile banking by
integrating TAM with perceived benefits and perceived risks – i.e. social risk,
performance risk, financial risk, time risk, security risk and privacy risk. Unlike
previous studies, the six perceived risk dimensions were included in the model.

Technology acceptance model (TAM)


The technology acceptance model (TAM), introduced by Davis (1989), is used for
modeling user acceptance of information systems. The goal of TAM is to provide an
explanation of the determinants of computer acceptance (Davis et al., 1989). TAM
posits that two particular beliefs – i.e. perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use
– are of primary relevance for computer acceptance behaviors (Figure 1). In general,
TAM examines the mediating role of perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness on
the probability of system use (Legris et al., 2003). Perceived usefulness (PU) is defined
as “the prospective user’s subjective probability that using a specific application
system will increase his or her job performance within an organizational context”.
Perceived ease of use (PEoU) refers to “the degree to which the prospective user expects Mobile banking
the target system to be free of effort” (Davis et al., 1989, p. 985). adoption
In the model, both, perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEoU)
predict attitude (A), defined as the user’s evaluation of the desirability to use the
system. The individual’s behavioral intention (BI) is directly influenced by the attitude
(A) and perceived usefulness (PU). TAM is found as able to provide a reasonable
depiction of a user’s intention to use technology (Legris et al., 2003). And it has been 447
widely utilized in research to determine the probability of adopting an online system
and user perceptions of system use (Alsajjan and Dennis, 2010; Teo et al., 1999; Gefen
and Straub, 2000; Moon and Kim, 2001). On this basis, it was hypothesized that:
H1. Perceived usefulness positively affects the attitude towards using mobile
banking.
H2. Perceived ease of use positively affects the perceived usefulness of mobile
banking.
H3. Perceived ease of use positively affects the attitude towards using mobile
banking.
H4. Perceived usefulness positively affects the behavioral intention to use mobile
banking.
H5. Attitude towards using mobile banking positively affects the behavioral
intention to use mobile banking.

Perceived risk
Perceived risk, introduced by Bauer (1960), refers to the nature and amount of risk
perceived by a consumer in contemplating a particular purchase decision. Presumably
a consumer is motivated to make a purchase in order to attain some set of buying
goals. The element of risk is often present because prior to making a purchase the
consumer cannot always be certain the planned purchase will allow them to achieve
their buying goals.
Jacoby and Kaplan (1972) inferred from Bauer’s seminal work an overall measure of
perceived risk, pointing to its five key facets:
(1) financial risk;
(2) performance risk;
(3) social risk;

Figure 1.
Technology acceptance
model
MIP (4) physical risk; and
30,4 (5) psychological risk.

In the literature, the notion of time risk determined by Roselius (1971) has also been
taken as a dimension of perceived risk (Stone and Gronhaug, 1993; Dholokia, 1997).
In addition to these perceived classic risk dimensions, the emergence of the internet
448 and hyperspace has created new forms of risk perceptions, privacy risk (Cases,
2002, Pikkarainen et al., 2004) and security risk (Pikkarainen et al., 2004) (see
Table I).
Lee et al. (2003) claimed that the perceived risk dimensions, with the exception of
psychological risk, could explain why consumers might not want to adopt mobile
banking services. They found psychological risk to be not notably relevant to the issue
of mobile banking adoption. Besides, earlier studies have argued that perceived
financial cost (Luarn and Lin, 2005), security issues (Brown et al., 2003; Luarn and Lin,
2005), performance-related risks (Featherman and Pavlou, 2003) are the essential
variables in determining the adoption of mobile banking services. Walker and Johnson
(2006) put forward that willingness to use the internet and telephone for financial and
shopping services is influenced by:
(1) the individual sense of personal capacity or capability;
(2) the perceived risks and relative advantages; and
(3) the extent to which contact with service personnel is preferred or deemed
necessary.

On that basis, it was hypothesized that:


H6a. Perceived social risk negatively affects the behavioral intention to use mobile
banking.

Risk dimension Definition

Performance risk The possibility of the product malfunctioning


Financial risk The potential monetary outlay associated with the
initial purchase price as well as the subsequent
maintenance cost of the product
Time risk The possibility of losing time to learn how to use the
product
Psychological risk The risk that the selection or performance of the
producer will have a negative effect on the
consumer’s peace of mind or self-perception
Social risk Potential loss of status in one’s social group as a
result of adopting a product
Table I. Privacy risk Potential loss of control over personal information
Definition of perceived
risk dimensions used in Security risk Potential loss of control over transactions and
the study financial information
H6b. Perceived performance risk negatively affects the behavioral intention to use Mobile banking
mobile banking. adoption
H6c. Perceived financial risk negatively affects the behavioral intention to use
mobile banking.
H6d. Perceived time risk negatively affects the behavioral intention to use mobile
banking. 449
Laforet and Li (2005) found that Chinese respondents attach more importance to
security than convenience, ease of use, or universal access to a wide range of services.
On that basis, it was hypothesized that:
H6e. Perceived security risk negatively affects the behavioral intention to use
mobile banking.
H6f. Perceived privacy risk negatively affects the behavioral intention to use
mobile banking.

Perceived benefit
Long before the internet it was known that consumers generally engage in
“cost-benefit” analysis when selecting a decision-making procedure (Wright, 1975). In
buying situations, consumers look for certain benefits from the product solution, and
see products as a bundle of attributes delivering benefits (Kotler and Armstrong, 2003).
More recently, in studying mobile banking it has been suggested the customer’s
purchase of a product includes cognitive and affective evaluation of utilitarian and
hedonistic benefits (Kim et al., 2007). Besides, consumers assess the value to the
products by comparing the perceived benefit and perceived sacrifice.
Perceived benefit is found as an important factor in understanding online banking.
Lee (2009) figured out that the intention to use online banking is primarily and
positively affected by perceived benefit. And Laforet and Li (2005) found that the lack
of grasping these benefits is an important barrier to adoption. Therefore, it was
hypothesized that:
H7. Perceived benefit positively affects the behavioral intention to use mobile
banking.
In sum, the research model can be schematized graphically as in Figure 2.

Research methodology
Measures and data collection
A structured instrument was used to collect data including multi-item measures using
a five-point Likert scale: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude to use
mobile banking, and perceived benefit were adapted from Lee (2009); intention to use
mobile banking was adapted from Kim et al. (2007); perceived social risk, perceived
financial risk, perceived performance risk, and perceived time risk were adapted from
Stone and Gronhaug (1993); and perceived security and privacy risk were adapted from
Pikkarainen et al. (2004).
In the literature it was found that a typical user of online banking is a highly
educated, relatively young and wealthy person with a good knowledge of computers,
MIP
30,4

450

Figure 2.
Proposed research model

especially the internet (Karjaluoto et al., 2002). The data were gathered through
face-to-face interviews with 435 university students. Mobile banking users were
eliminated with a filter question because risk perception differs in the pre- and
post-purchase phases (Mitchell and Boustani, 1992). On that basis, the research sample
exhibits the characteristics of being a non-user, as well as their future prospect of
engaging in mobile banking in the next few years. The socio-demographics of the
sample are presented in Table II.

Analyses and results


Exploratory factor analysis and reliability analysis
Exploratory factor analysis is used to confirm whether items loaded correctly to the
corresponding factors as identified before. Moreover, it is used to prevent
multicolinearity, which causes misleading results (Sharma, 1996). With exploratory
Mobile banking
n Percentage
adoption
Age
18 1 0.2
19 19 4.4
20 82 18.9
21 101 23.2 451
22 109 25.0
23 66 15.2
24 30 6.9
25 27 6.2
Total 435 100.0
Gender
Female 280 64.4
Male 155 36.4
Total 435 100.0
Family income ($US)
1,000 EUR or below 192 44.1
1,001-2,000 EUR 148 34.0
2,001 EUR and above 23 5.2
Total 435 100.0
Monthly expenditure ($US)
125 EUR and below 112 25.7
126-250 EUR 178 41.0
251-375 EUR 70 16.1 Table II.
376-500 EUR 37 8.5 The demographic
501 EUR and above 38 8.7 characteristics of the
Total 435 100.0 sample

factor analysis, five items that had poor psychometric properties were removed. In
Table III, the results of Cronbach’s a and the total variance explained are displayed.

Structural model testing


The overall fit measures of the structural model indicate an adequate fit of the model to
the data ( x2 =df ¼ 2:51, CFI ¼ 0:903, TLI ¼ 0:889, IFI ¼ 0:904, GFI ¼ 0:848,
RMSEA ¼ 0:06). The results provide strong support for the conceptual model
displayed in Figure 1, and Table IV presents a summary of the hypotheses tests. Six of
the hypothesized paths of the structural model are highly significant (a ¼ 0:01):
H1. Perceived usefulness ! Attitude;
H2. Perceived ease of use ! Perceived usefulness;
H4. Attitude ! Intention;
H6a. Perceived social risk ! Attitude;
H7. Perceived benefit ! Attitude; and
H6b. Perceived performance risk ! Attitude.
MIP Scales Factor loadings Cronbach’s a
30,4
Social risk 0.888
If I used mobile banking, I think I would be held in higher
esteem by my associates at work 0.887
The thought of using mobile banking causes me concern
452 because some friends would think I was just being showy 0.914
I think that using mobile banking would provide me with a
higher social status 0.827
Performance risk 0.700
I worry about whether mobile banking will really perform
as well as it is supposed to 0.809
I am concerned that the mobile banking will not provide
the level of benefits that I would be expecting 0.738
Financial risk 0.867
I think that the operating system of mobile banking would
not function well 0.689
I think that there would be problems with my financial
transactions while using mobile banking 0.787
When using mobile banking, I am afraid that I will lose
money due to careless mistakes 0.756
When using mobile banking, I may lose money because my
account information is hacked 0.827
I think that using mobile banking is financially risky 0.734
Time risk 0.713
I think I would spend too much time learning how to use
mobile banking 0.689
Using a mobile banking service would lead to a loss of
convenience for me because I would have to waste a lot of
time fixing payment errors 0.751
Because of some problems in the operating system, I think
that mobile banking would not run fast and cause time loss 0.796
Security risk 0.798
I trust in an online bank as a bank 0.836
I am not worried about the security of an online bank 0.828
Matters of security have no influence on using an online
bank 0.832
Privacy risk 0.831
Using an online bank is financially secure 0.836
I trust in the ability of an online bank to protect my privacy 0.821
I trust in the technology an online bank is using 0.790
Perceived usefulness 0.863
I think that using mobile banking would enable me to
accomplish my tasks more quickly 0.800
Table III. I think that using mobile banking would make it easier for
Descriptive statistics, me to carry out my tasks 0.877
exploratory factor I think mobile banking is useful 0.857
analysis and Cronbach’s Overall, I think that using mobile banking is advantageous 0.837
a Coefficients (continued)
Scales Factor loadings Cronbach’s a
Mobile banking
adoption
Perceived ease of use 0.771
I think that learning to use mobile banking would be easy 0.846
I think that learning to use mobile banking does not require
a lot of mental effort 0.830
I think that it is easy to use mobile banking to accomplish 453
my banking tasks 0.808
Perceived benefit 0.796
I think that using mobile banking can save my time in
performing banking transactions 0.860
I think that using mobile banking can offer me a wider
range of banking products, services and investment
opportunities 0.855
I think that using mobile banking can save the transaction
handling fees in performing banking transactions 0.818
Attitude 0.879
I think that using mobile banking is a good idea 0.857
I think that using mobile banking for financial transactions
would be a wise idea 0.885
I think that using mobile banking is pleasant 0.870
In my opinion, it is desirable to use mobile banking 0.818
Adoption intention 0.921
I plan to use M-internet in the future 0.935
I intend to use M-internet in the future 0.955
I predict I would use M-internet in the future 0.900 Table III.

The squared multiple correlations (R 2) for the dependent variables (perceived


usefulness, PU; attitude towards mobile banking, Att; Intention to use, Int.) were 0.223
(PU); 0.684 (Att); 0.529 (Int). Similar to the R 2 value obtained in a multiple regression, a
squared multiple correlation can be obtained from the SEM to quantify the percentage
of variability in the outcome that is explained by the predictor variables

Estimate SE CR p Supported

H1 Att ˆ PU 0.363 0.046 7.841 *** Yes


H2 PU ˆ PEoU 0.621 0.080 7.763 *** Yes
H3 Int ˆ PU 0.066 0.063 1.047 0.295 No
H4 Int ˆ Att 0.855 0.072 11.881 *** Yes
H5 Att ˆ PEoU 0.015 0.431 0.034 0.973 No
H6a Att ˆ PSocR 0.132 0.041 3.218 0.001 Yes
H6b Att ˆ PPerR 20.131 0.050 22.618 0.009 Yes
H6c Att ˆ PFinR 0.017 0.068 0.245 0.806 No
H6d Att ˆ PTimR 0.089 0.055 1.620 0.105 No
H6e Att ˆ PSecR 20.050 0.055 20.922 0.357 No
H6f Att ˆ PPrivR 0.201 0.335 0.599 0.549 No
H7 Att ˆ PBen 0.434 0.065 6.649 *** Yes
Table IV.
Notes: PU ¼ 0:223; R 2 Att ¼ 0:684; R 2 Int: ¼ 0:529 Hypotheses tests
MIP (Neumark-Sztaineret al., 2003), inasmuch as it represents the direct effects and the
30,4 causal power of the model. In the study, the predictor variables explain 68 percent of
the variability in “attitude towards mobile banking” and 53 percent of the variability in
“intention to use mobile banking”.

Discussion
454 This study puts forward the empirically grounded argument that the mobile banking
adoption intentions of future prospects are dominantly influenced by their attitudes
towards mobile banking and these are affected by its perceived usefulness, perceived
benefit, social risk, and performance risk.
Perceived usefulness is closely related to the subjective probability that using
mobile banking is advantageous and will make banking easier. At that point, when
consumers perceive that using mobile banking will enable them to accomplish their
tasks more quickly, make it easier to carry out their banking-related tasks and is
advantageous overall, they develop a positive attitude towards mobile banking. The
usefulness perception of consumers is affected by the ease of use perception. Perceived
ease of use refers to the expectation that using mobile banking will be free of effort.
When consumers perceive that learning and using mobile banking is easy, their
positive perceptions of usefulness increase.
Attitude towards mobile banking is also affected by perceived social risk and
performance risk. In our original research design we expected to discover the
relationship between perceived financial risk, perceived security risk, perceived
privacy risk and attitude, but no such connections were detected. That absence of
evidence is no doubt to be explained by the age of the respondents. The sample was
constituted by university students aged 18-25. This age and education-level cohort
normally has considerable experience of online banking and shopping, mobile phones,
and mobile internet. Researchers in the area of technology adoption, adoption theory
and social psychology domains widely agree that prior experience of technology at the
individual level “lead[s] to positive or negative expectations of one’s personal abilities
to use that or related technologies” (Lee et al., 2003 p. 344). Moreover, Karjaluoto et al.
(2002) persuasively demonstrate that prior experience with computers and
technologies and attitudes towards computers influence both attitudes towards
online banking and actual behaviors. In addition, Featherman and Pavlou (2003)
verified that since the sample population of university students was younger, more
computer-literate, and more comfortable with internet-based transactions, their
perceived risk levels are likely to be reduced as compared to the general population.
Furthermore, some studies have argued that security issues are not in fact major
determinants in banking transactions (Laukkanen, 2007; Laukkanen and Lauronen,
2005). Furthermore, Chau and Ngai (2010) found that young people (age 16-29) have
more positive attitudes and behavioral intentions towards using IBS than other user
groups. It was thus concluded that because of their experiences, their attitudes to
mobile banking are not determined by their perceptions of privacy risk, security risk,
or financial risk. Rather, their attitude is negatively affected by perceived social risk
and performance risk.
Perceived social risk is “the potential loss of status in one’s social group as a result
of adopting a product or service, looking foolish or untrendy” (Featherman and Pavlou,
2003 p. 455). On that basis, social risk includes issues such as whether mobile banking
usage will be socially acceptable and others’ positive or negative perceptions of mobile Mobile banking
banking may affect the usage decision (Zhao et al., 2008). Social risk regarding mobile adoption
banking adoption may from this perspective actually be grounded in the subjective
normative concept related to the theory of planned behavior, self-prestige and self-
expressiveness. Subjective norms refer to “the person’s perception that most people
who are important to him think he should or should not perform the behavior in
question” (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975, p. 302). It is a function of the perceived social 455
pressure to engage in the behavior (Tan and Teo, 2000). In general, the key point here is
that the adopter’s friends, family, and colleagues/peers are reference groups that will
potentially strongly influence adoption (Chau, 1986). Furthermore, it is argued that the
use of mobile banking services can increase one’s self-prestige (Lee et al., 2003) and that
perceived self-expressiveness directly affects the attitude to use of a technological
innovation (Pedersen and Nysveen, 2003).
The other perceived risk dimension affecting the attitude towards mobile banking
was identified as performance risk, which is well defined as “the possibility of the
product malfunctioning and not performing as it was designed and advertised and
therefore failing to deliver the desired benefits” (Grewal et al., 1994). That older insight
into common sense anxiety and marketing amplifies the findings of Lee (2009) and
Zhao et al. (2008) about online banking adoption. also, in a qualitative study, Lee et al.
(2003) determined that performance risk together with the other risk dimensions is
important in mobile banking adoption.
As a result of the study perceived benefit is found as a major determinant
(b ¼ 0:434) of the attitude towards mobile banking. That result is consistent with the
studies of Lee (2009), and Featherman and Fuller (2002) of online banking. In mobile
banking, when the consumers perceive that mobile banking saves time, offers a wide
range of services and can save the transaction handling fees, they develop a positive
attitude and therefore intent to use mobile banking applications.

Conclusion and implications


Mobile banking is an emerging concept and its market potential is expected to be high.
However, the diffusion rate is low. To extend the literature on mobile banking and
explore the parameters and boundary conditions of this predicament, this study
investigated empirically the adoption intention of mobile banking. This study
proposes a model based on risk and benefit perceptions, and integrates with TAM to
explain the adoption intention.
From a theoretical point of view, this research has served to broaden the
understanding of the factors influencing mobile banking adoption from the
perspectives of future prospects who are not current users. The main theoretical
contribution of this research is the development of a risk-benefit model by extending
TAM. The findings of the research are consistent with the literature of online and
mobile banking.
From the managerial point of view, this study produces valuable insights regarding
future prospects. In the adoption of mobile banking, attitude is found to be the main
determinant. When consumers think that using mobile banking is pleasant and a good
idea, wise to use for financial transactions and perceive it as desirable, they tend to
adopt mobile banking applications. These attitudes are affected by the perception of
benefits and social and performance risks. Therefore, the banks should rely upon
MIP increasing perceptions of the beneficial nature of phone banking. Simultaneously,
30,4 decreases of social and performance risk should be strongly promoted. In that sense,
the banks should keep in mind that information and guidance significantly increase the
perceived value added provided by mobile banking and decrease the perceived risks
related to the innovation (Laukkanen and Kiviniemi, 2010).
In terms of willingness to use technology effectively consumers’ attitudes towards
456 technology, their use of IT and involvement with implementation pays dividends. In
that sense appropriate organizational changes should be put in place to optimize on the
potential benefits offered by technological change (Phillips and Wright, 2009).
This study reflects the perceptions of nonusers and university students in an
emerging country. This is the main limitation of the study. Further research
concerning the model should extend testing to older age groups with different profiles.
To generalize the findings, the results should be verified through investigations in
industrialized countries.

References
Alsajjan, B. and Dennis, C. (2010), “Internet banking acceptance model: cross-market
examination”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63 Nos 9/10, pp. 957-63.
Bauer, R.A. (1960), “Consumer behaviour as risk taking”, in Cox, D.F. (Ed.), Risk Taking and
Information Handling in Consumer Behaviour, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA,
pp. 22-3.
Brown, I., Cajee, Z., Davies, D. and Stroebel, S. (2003), “Cell phone banking: predictors of adoption
in South Africa – an exploratory study”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 381-94.
Cases, A.S. (2002), “Perceived risk and risk reduction strategies in internet shopping”, The
International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 12 No. 4,
pp. 375-94.
Chau, P.Y.K. (1996), “An empirical assessment of a modified technology acceptance model”,
Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 185-95.
Chau, V.S. and Ngai, L.W.L.C. (2010), “The youth market for internet banking services:
perceptions, attitude and behaviour”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 42-60.
Cortinas, M., Chocarro, R. and Villanueva, M.L. (2010), “Understanding multi-channel banking
customers”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63 No. 11, pp. 1215-21.
Cruz, P., Neto, L.N.F., Munoz-Gallego, P. and Laukkanen, T. (2010), “Mobile banking rollout in
emerging markets: evidence from Brazil”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 28
No. 5, pp. 342-71.
Davis, F.D. (1989), “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of computer
technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 319-40.
Davis, F.D., Bogazzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1989), “User acceptance of computer technology:
a comparison of two theoretical models”, Management Science, Vol. 35 No. 8, pp. 982-1003.
Dholokia, U.M. (1997), “An investigation of the relationship between perceived risk and product
involvement”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 159-67.
Featherman, M. and Fuller, M. (2002), “Applying TAM to e-services adoption: the moderating
role of perceived risk”, Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences (HICSS-36), Big Island, HI, January 6-9, pp. 1-11.
Featherman, M.S. and Pavlou, P.A. (2003), “Predicting e-services adoption: a perceived risk facets
perspective”, International Journal of Human Computer Studies, Vol. 59 No. 4, pp. 471-4.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Mobile banking
Research, Addison Wesley, Reading, MA.
Gefen, D. and Straub, D. (2000), “The relative importance of perceived ease-of-use in IS adoption:
adoption
a study of e-commerce adoption”, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 1
No. 8, pp. 1-20.
Goswami, D. and Raghavendran, S. (2009), “Mobile banking: can elephants and hippos tango?”,
Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 14-20. 457
Grewal, D., Gotlieb, J. and Marmorstein, H. (1994), “The moderating effects of message framing
and source credibility on the price-perceived risk relationship”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 145-53.
Jacob, K. (2007), “Are mobile payments the smart cards of the aughts?”, Chicago Fed Letter
No. 240 (2007), Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Jacoby, J. and Kaplan, L.B. (1972), “The components of perceived risk”, in Venkatesan, M. (Ed.),
Proceedings of The Third Annual Conference of The Association for Consumer Research,
Association for Consumer Research, Duluth, MN, pp. 382-93.
Karjaluoto, H., Mattila, M. and Pento, T. (2002), “Factors underlying attitude formation towards
online banking in Finland”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 6,
pp. 261-72.
Kim, G., Shin, B. and Lee, H.G. (2009), “Understanding dynamics between initial trust and usage
intentions of mobile banking”, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 283-311.
Kim, H.W., Chan, H.C. and Gupta, S. (2007), “Value-based adoption of mobile internet:
an empirical investigation”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 111-26.
Koenig-Lewis, N., Palmer, A. and Moll, A. (2010), “Predicting young consumers’ take up of
mobile banking services”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 5,
pp. 410-32.
Kotler, P. and Armstrong, G. (2010), Principles of Marketing, 10th ed., Pearson Education
International, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Laforet, S. and Li, X. (2005), “Customers’ attitudes towards online and mobile banking in China”,
International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 362-80.
Laukkanen, T. (2007), “Customer preferred channel attributes in multi channel electronic
banking”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 35 No. 5,
pp. 393-412.
Laukkanen, T. and Lauronen, J. (2005), “Consumer value creation in mobile banking services”,
International Journal of Mobile Communications, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 325-38.
Laukkanen, T. and Kiviniemi, V. (2010), “The role of information in mobile banking resistance”,
International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 372-88.
Laukkanen, T. and Passanen, M. (2008), “Mobile banking innovations and early adopters: how
they differ from other online users?”, Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 2,
pp. 86-94.
Lee, M.C. (2009), “Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking: an integration of TAM
and TPB with perceived risk and perceived benefit”, Electronic Commerce Research and
Applications, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 130-41.
Lee, M.S.Y., McGoldrick, P.F., Keeling, K.A. and Doherty, J. (2003), “Using ZMET to explore
barriers to the adoption of 3G mobile banking services”, International Journal of Retail
& Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 340-8.
Legris, P., Ingham, J. and Collerette, P. (2003), “Why do people use information technology?
A critical review of the technology acceptance model”, Information & Management, Vol. 40
No. 2, pp. 191-204.
MIP Liao, Z. and Cheung, M.T. (2002), “Internet-based e-banking and consumer attitudes: an empirical
study”, Information & Management, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 282-95.
30,4
Luarn, P. and Lin, H.H. (2005), “Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use
mobile banking”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 873-91.
Mitchell, V.W. and Boustani, P. (1992), “Market development using new products and new
customers: a role for perceived risk”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 2,
458 pp. 17-32.
Moon, J. and Kim, Y. (2001), “Extending the TAM for a world-wide-web context”, Information
& Management, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 217-30.
Neumark-Sztainer, D., Wall, M., Perry, C. and Story, M. (2003), “Correlates of fruit and vegetable
intake among adolescents: findings from Project EAT”, Preventive Medicine, Vol. 37 No. 2,
pp. 198-208.
Pedersen, P.E. and Nysveen, H. (2003), “Usefulness and self-expressiveness: extending TAM to
explain the adoption of mobile parking services”, Proceedings of the 16th Bled eCommerce
Conference, Bled, pp. 705-17.
Phillips, P.A. and Wright, C. (2009), “E-business’s impact on organizational flexibility”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 62 No. 11, pp. 1071-80.
Pikkarainen, T., Pikkarainen, K., Karjaluoto, H. and Pahnila, S. (2004), “Consumer acceptance of
online banking: an extension of the technology acceptance model”, Internet Research,
Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 224-35.
Pousttchi, K. and Schurig, M. (2004), “Assessment of today’s mobile banking applications from
the view of consumer requirements”, Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 37), January 5-8, Big Island, HI.
Püschel, J., Mazzon, H.A. and Hernandez, J.M.C. (2010), “Mobile banking: proposition of an
integrated adoption intention framework”, International Journal of Bank Marketing,
Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 389-409.
Riquelme, H.E. and Rios, R.E. (2010), “The moderating effect of gender in the adoption of mobile
banking”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 328-41.
Roselius, T. (1971), “Consumer rankings of risk reduction methods”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35
No. 1, pp. 56-61.
Sharma, S. (1996), Applied Multivariate Techniques, Wiley, New York, NY.
Stone, R.N. and Gronhaug, K. (1993), “Perceived risk: further considerations for the marketing
discipline”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 39-50.
Tan, M. and Teo, T.S.H. (2000), “Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking”, Journal of
the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 1 No. 5, pp. 1-42.
Teo, S., Lim, V. and Lai, R. (1999), “Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in internet usage”, Omega:
The International Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 25-37.
Walker, R.H. and Johnson, L.W. (2006), “Why consumers use and do not use technology-enabled
services”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 125-35.
Wright, P. (1975), “Consumer choice strategies: simplifying vs optimization”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 60-7.
Zhao, A.L., Lloyd, S.H., Ward, P. and Goode, M.M.H. (2008), “Perceived risk and Chinese
consumers’ internet banking adoption”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 26
No. 7, pp. 505-25.
About the authors Mobile banking
Ulun Akturan is Assistant Professor in the Department of Marketing, Galatasaray University
(Istanbul, Turkey). She specializes in consumer behaviour, brand management and marketing adoption
research. She has published national and international papers on consumer behaviour, brand
management and young adults. Ulun Akturan is the corresponding author and can be contacted
at: uakturan@gsu.edu.tr
Nuray Tezcan is Assistant Professor in Faculty of Business Administration, Halic University
(Istanbul, Turkey). She specializes in research methodology, quantitative techniques and 459
statistics. She has published national and international papers on young adults, multivariate
analysis and parametric and non-parametric regression.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com


Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

You might also like