The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mobile payments adoption by US consumers: an extended TAM
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to incorporate mobile payment (MP) self-efficacy, new technology anxiety, and MP privacy concerns into the basic TAM to explore MP adoption, particularly tap-and-go payment, among US consumers. Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected through an online survey conducted among students at a Midwestern University in the USA. A total of 254 participants provided 240 useable responses. Findings: MP self-efficacy significantly impacts perceived ease of use (PEOUMP) and perceived usefulness of MP (PUMP). These in turn impact MP attitude, which affects intention to use MP. Privacy concerns also impact attitude towards MP and MP use intention. New technology anxiety impacts PEOUMP, but not PUMP. Research limitations/implications: The study uses a convenience sample of young US consumers, which could limit the generalisability of the results. The study is also limited to tap-and-go payment. Practical implications: US retailers have information on some of the factors that encourage MP adoption. Retailers need to address self-efficacy concerns, MP privacy concerns, and consumers’ perceptions of usefulness of the technology. Originality/value: There has been little research on factors impacting tap-and-go payment adoption in the USA. The study highlights the roles of self-efficacy and privacy concerns. It focusses on tap-and-go payment, since this technology can enhance consumers’ retail experience.
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:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835
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
Herne, H., Cooley, W. W., & Lohnes, P. R. (1973) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2344428 · Cited by 35,697
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005 · Cited by 27,200
User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · Cited by 25,709
A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 · Cited by 23,066
Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x · Cited by 8,159
Venkatesh, V. (2000) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872 · Cited by 6,664
Cited by
Patil, P., Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., & Raghavan, V. (2020) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102144 · Cited by 820
Point of adoption and beyond. Initial trust and mobile-payment continuation intention
Talwar, S., Dhir, A., Khalil, A., Mohan, G., & Islam, A. K. M. N. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102086 · Cited by 363
de Blanes Sebastián, M. G., Antonovica, A., & Sarmiento Guede, J. R. (2023) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122235 · Cited by 86
Mobile payment adoption in Latin America
Bailey, A. A., Bonifield, C. M., Arias, A., & Villegas, J. (2022) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-04-2021-0130 · Cited by 78
Self-citationIntention to adopt services by AI avatar: A protection motivation theory perspective
Park, J., Yun, J., & Chang, W. (2024) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103929 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Bailey, A. A., Pentina, I., Mishra, A. S., & Ben Mimoun, M. S.
- Venue
- International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2017-06-12
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 626-640
- ISSN
- 0959-0552 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2609337954
- Cited by
- 309
- References
- 58
- FWCI
- 28.01
- 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: Mobile payments adoption by US consumers: an extended TAM. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/ijrdm-08-2016-0144
- The paper
- Bailey, A. A., Pentina, I., Mishra, A. S., & Ben Mimoun, M. S. (2017). Mobile payments adoption by US consumers: an extended TAM. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijrdm-08-2016-0144
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.