The DOI matches its Crossref record; 140 of the 140 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding consumer adoption of mobile payment in India: Extending Meta-UTAUT model with personal innovativeness, anxiety, trust, and grievance redressal
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Mobile payments are the future as we move towards a cashless society. In some markets, cash is already being replaced by digital transactions, but consumers of many developing countries are slower in transition towards digital payments. This study aims to identify major determinants of consumer mobile payment adoption in India the country with second largest mobile subscribers in the world. Existing mobile payments adoption studies have predominantly utilised Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which was primarily developed in organisational context and criticised for having deterministic approach without much consideration for users’ individual characteristics. Therefore, this study adapted meta-UTAUT model with individual difference variable attitude as core construct and extended the model with consumer related constructs such as personal innovativeness, anxiety, trust, and grievance redressal. Empirical examination of the model among 491 Indian consumers revealed performance expectancy, intention to use, and grievance redressal as significant positive predictor of consumer use behaviour towards mobile payment. Moreover, intention to use was significantly influenced by attitude, social influence, and facilitating conditions. The major contribution of this study includes re-affirming the central role of attitude in consumer adoption studies and examining usage behaviour in contrast to most existing studies, which examine only behavioural intention.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
1 retracted
RETRACTED: Modeling the Interaction of Users and Mobile Payment System: Conceptual Framework
Shin, D. (2010) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2010.502098 · Cited by 152
RetractedEvaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151312 · Cited by 109,314
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983) · Cited by 79,867
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
Cited by
Vimalkumar, M., Sharma, S. K., Singh, J. B., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2021.106763 · Cited by 402
Balakrishnan, J., Abed, S. S., & Jones, P. (2022) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121692 · Cited by 307
Camilleri, M. A. (2024) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123247 · Cited by 261
Li, W. (2025) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2310354 · Cited by 167
Acosta-Enriquez, B. G., Arbulú Ballesteros, M. A., Huamaní Jordan, O., López Roca, C., & Saavedra Tirado, K. (2024) · BMC Psychology · doi:10.1186/s40359-024-01764-z · Cited by 164
“This hypothesis has been tested in previous studies [75, 77].”
BackgroundResult
Metadata
- Authors
- Patil, P., Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., & Raghavan, V.
- Venue
- International Journal of Information Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-10
- Volume
- 54
- Pages
- 102144
- ISSN
- 0268-4012 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3025096376
- Cited by
- 820
- References
- 140
- FWCI
- 97.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Understanding consumer adoption of mobile payment in India: Extending Meta-UTAUT model with personal innovativeness, anxiety, trust, and grievance redressal. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102144
- The paper
- Patil, P., Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., & Raghavan, V. (2020). Understanding consumer adoption of mobile payment in India: Extending Meta-UTAUT model with personal innovativeness, anxiety, trust, and grievance redressal. International Journal of Information Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102144
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.