The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Consumer resistance to internet banking: postponers, opponents and rejectors
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to further the understanding of innovation resistance by dividing internet banking non‐adopters into three groups based on their intentions to use the innovation. Thereafter, the aim is to identify how the resistance differs in these customer groups. Design/methodology/approach: This study identifies three groups of internet banking non‐adopters, namely postponers, opponents and rejectors. The data were collected by conducting an extensive postal survey among the retail banking customers in Finland who had not adopted internet banking. The measurement development was based on consumer resistance theory and the earlier literature on internet banking. Principal component analysis was used to classify the resistance items into five adoption barriers derived from the earlier literature. Thereafter, analysis of variance was used to analyse the statistical differences in resistance to internet banking between the three groups. Findings: Significant differences were identified between the groups explored. The resistance of the rejectors is much more intense and diverse than that of the opponents, while the postponers show only slight resistance. The results also indicate that psychological barriers are even higher determinants of resistance than usage and value, which are constructs related to ease‐of‐use and usefulness determining acceptance in the traditional technology acceptance model. Moreover, the findings highlight the role of self‐efficacy in bank customers' risk perceptions to internet banking. Originality/value: This study provides further understanding of what inhibits internet banking adoption by comparing three non‐adopter groups with respect to their resistance to internet banking. It also has implications for management in overcoming non‐adopters' resistance to the innovation.
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
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
Parasuraman, A. (2000) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/109467050024001 · Cited by 3,328
Wu, J.-H., & Wang, S.-C. (2005) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2004.07.001 · Cited by 2,284
Dabholkar, P. A., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2002) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1177/0092070302303001 · Cited by 1,898
Consumer acceptance of online banking: an extension of the technology acceptance model
Pikkarainen, T., Pikkarainen, K., Karjaluoto, H., & Pahnila, S. (2004) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/10662240410542652 · Cited by 1,772
Cited by
Online shopping drivers and barriers for older adults: Age and gender differences
Lian, J.-W., & Yen, D. C. (2014) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.028 · Cited by 660
Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., & Algharabat, R. (2018) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.08.026 · Cited by 576
Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers
Kushwah, S., Dhir, A., Sagar, M., & Gupta, B. (2019) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2019.104402 · Cited by 443
What drives FinTech adoption? A multi-method evaluation using an adapted technology acceptance model
Singh, S., Sahni, M. M., & Kovid, R. K. (2020) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/md-09-2019-1318 · Cited by 433
Predicting the intentions to use chatbots for travel and tourism
Melián-González, S., Gutiérrez-Taño, D., & Bulchand-Gidumal, J. (2021) · Current Issues in Tourism · doi:10.1080/13683500.2019.1706457 · Cited by 406
Metadata
- Authors
- Laukkanen, P., Sinkkonen, S., & Laukkanen, T.
- Venue
- International Journal of Bank Marketing
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2008-09-05
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 440-455
- ISSN
- 0265-2323 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2033135008
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 12.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Consumer resistance to internet banking: postponers, opponents and rejectors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/02652320810902451
- The paper
- Laukkanen, P., Sinkkonen, S., & Laukkanen, T. (2008). Consumer resistance to internet banking: postponers, opponents and rejectors. International Journal of Bank Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/02652320810902451
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.