A STUDY ON ADOPTION OF MOBILE WALLET AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS

IN TIRUCHIRAPPALLI CITY
Dr. G. Yashodha, Assistant Professor,
Department of Commerce (Self Financed), Seethalakshmi Ramaswami College,
Tiruchirappalli.

ABSTRACT
Contactless payments let customers wave their smart phone across a reader or tap a
credit card. Compared to swiping a reader or inserting a credit card, which takes longer,
contactless payments are faster.  For mobile phones, contactless payments work through a
mobile app. Companies such as Apple, Samsung, and Google now have ApplePay,
SamsungPay, and GooglePay. Once the app is downloading, customers can insert their credit
and debit cards. When it comes time to pay, the customer can bring up the app, wave their
phone across the reader, and the payment is processed. In recent years smart phone
companies command a great deal of the mobile payments wallet market. Through mobile
wallet applications like Android Pay, Apple Pay and Samsung Pay, smart phone users have
broad access to mobile wallet apps. And consumer awareness of digital payments has been
steadily growing. So this Research found out the adoption of mobile wallet among college
students in Tiruchirappalli city.
Keywords: Contactless payments, mobile wallet services, use of technology.
INTRODUCTION
A mobile wallet is a virtual wallet that stores payment card information on a mobile
device. Mobile wallets are a convenient way for a user to make in-store payments and can be
used at merchants listed with the mobile wallet service provider. Touch a button; pay for your
coffee. Mobile wallets empower consumers to make every transaction with increased speed
and convenience. Since Apple Pay launched in 2014, followed by Android and Samsung Pay
2015, consumers have enjoyed the power to pay at their fingertips. Although adoption rates
are on the rise, obstacles to more widespread consumer adoption remain. To get you up to
speed on the current state of mobile wallet trends, we'll look at the mobile wallet landscape,
adoption rates, barriers to entry and the implications for merchants.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Neeharika P & V N Sastry (2014), conducted a study on “A Novel Interoperable
Mobile Wallet Model with Capability based access control framework”, this study makes an
important contribution towards the development of a mobile wallet that can work across
various platforms. As security is the major concern when it comes to finance related
information, the study addresses the security issues by giving access control model that works
towards interoperable mobile wallet..
Nitika Rai, Anurag Ashok, Janhvi Chakraborty, Prajakta Arolker, Saumeel
Gajera (2012), made a study on “M-wallet: An SMS based payment system”, This paper
describes about replacing the current payment solutions like credit card, debit cards and cash
with a simple short Messaging services (SMS) based on solution that would work on all
mobile phones irrespective of the network carrier and the manufacturer. Transactions can also
take place between consumers that have subscribed to the service and merchants irrespective
of their subscription. The study concludes that it is safer, faster and network independent
mode of payment.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To study the services provided by the M-wallet providers and the services used by the
M- wallet users.
2. To find out the awareness among the college students towards Mobile-wallet.
3. To study the preferences towards the usage of Mobile-wallets among the college
students in Tiruchirappalli city.
4. To identify the impact of demographic shift towards ‘Mobile-wallet’.

HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY

H01: There is no significant association between the demographic profile and hours spent on
mobile wallet services
H02: There is no significant association between the demographic profile and Years of using
mobile wallet
H03: There is no significant association between the preferences and the behavior intention
to use mobile wallet
H04: There is no significant association between the factors and the behavior intention to use
mobile wallet

SAMPLING TECHNIQUE
Since the actual sampling frame is unknown, convenience sampling is chosen to carry
out the survey (Leong et al. 2013). Convenience sampling is a more practical and quick
sampling method rather than a true random or stratified random sample (Weir & Jones,
2008). Questionnaires were randomly distributed to users at different college students. A
criterion for selecting respondents is set, that is respondents are familiar with using mobile
apps.
SAMPLING SIZE
Target Population for this study has been selected and the sample size was decided as
384. Z score is determined by confidence level. The probability there the value of a parameter
falls within a specified range of values i.e. the Confidence level 95% means the Z value is
1.96. Margin of error is a small amount that is allowed for incase of miscalculation or change
of circumstances. Generally the margin of error as 5% i.e. M is 0.05.

S = Z2 x P x (1-P) / M2
S = (1.96)2 x 0.5 x (1 - 0.5) / (0.05)2
S = 3.8416 x 0.25 / 0.0025 = 384.16
(S = sample size for infinite population, Z = Z score, P = Population proportion
assumed to be 50% = 0.5 and M = Margin of error)
So the sample size for infinite population is 384.16 i.e. 384

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this study, a combination of both Primary & Secondary data has been used.
Primary data is used in the form of questionnaire method, which has been created using
Google forms & distributed among internet users and also survey method. In addition to it,
secondary data has been used to support the study.
STATISTICAL TOOLS USED FOR DATA ANALYSIS
Frequency Analysis, Friedman Test, Kendall's W Test and Cross Tabulation
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Cronbach‘s alpha is the most widely used method to test the reliability and validity.
Any value more than 0.6 for the scale is reliable (Malhotra 2002; Cronble, 1951). The Alpha
values lies from 0.881 to 0.980 and hence questionnaire is reliable. The overall results of
reliability test indicate that the data is highly reliable with all independent and dependent
items included. Reliability analysis conducted to evaluate the internal consistency of
information. The alpha value between 0.5 - 0.9 is considered acceptable and the value 0.874
shows high reliability levels with all 20 items included. The highly reliability of the
instrument give the assurance to confidently test other statistical tools.
 Table 1
Frequency Percent
Gender Male 148 38.5
Female 236 61.5
Total 384 100.0
Age 18-20 yrs 151 39.3
21-25 yrs 140 36.5
26-30yrs 93 24.2
Total 384 100.0
Marital status Married 112 29.2
Unmarried 272 70.8
Total 384 100.0
Educational UG 179 46.6
Qualification
PG 163 42.4
Scholar 42 10.9
Total 384 100.0
Residential area Urban 169 44.0
Semi Urban 113 29.4
Rural 102 26.6
Total 384 100.0
Years of using < 1 year 118 30.7
mobile wallet
1-3 years 177 46.1
> 3 years 89 23.2
Total 384 100.0
Hours spent on Less than 1 hour 54 14.1
mobile wallet
services
1 - 3 hours 68 17.7
3 - 5 hours 141 36.7
Total 384 100.0
Demographic Profile
Majority 61.5% of the respondents are female, 39.3% of the respondents are in the
age group of 18-20 years, 70.8 % are unmarried, 46.6% of them are the students of
undergraduate programmes, 44% of the respondents are living in the Urban area,46.1 % of
the respondents are using mobile wallet for 1-3 years and 36.7% of the respondents are using
mobile wallet for 3-5 hours in a day.
 GW1
200
General Wallet App
100

Percent
GW4 0 GW2
Frequency

GW3

In General wallet App Majority of the students are using Phone pay (33.9%) followed by Pay
Tm (30.5%) services provided by the M-wallet providers.

Mobile operator payment

MOP1 MOP2
211
173

45.1 54.9

Frequency Percent

In mobile operator payment majority 54.9% of the students are using My Airtel (Airtel
money) and 45.1% are using Jio money

Bank owned mobile wallet app

BM1
200

100 Percent
Frequency
BM4 0 BM2

BM3
In Bank owned mobile wallet app the majority (38.3%) of the students are using Pockets-
UPI,Wallet,Bharat QR

HYPOTHESIS RESULTS
Hypothesis Test p-value Rejected/accepted
There is no significant association between Cross tabulation .000 Rejected
the demographic profile of the respondents
and hours spent on mobile wallet services.
There is no significant association between Cross tabulation .000 Rejected
the demographic profile of the respondents
and Years of using mobile wallet
There is no significant association between .000 Rejected
Friedman Test
the preferences and the behavior intention to
Chi-Square -
use mobile wallet
232.060
There is no significant association between Kendall's W Test .000 Rejected
the factors and the behavior intention to use Chi-Square -
mobile wallet 541.704

FINDINGS RELATED TO DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE

 Majority 55.1% of respondents are female students are very much interested
in using mobile wallet services
 Majority 70.4% of respondents are using Mobile Wallet. Unmarried students
are having more intension to use mobile wallet than married
 49.1% of respondents are currently pursuing II year students using mobile
wallet
 49.1% of respondents are from Autonomous College students having more
intension to use mobile wallet
 Majority 141 % of the respondents are using mobile wallet for several times
in a week and a month.
FINDINGS RELATED TO FACTORS INTENDED TO USE MOBILE-WALLET

 Majority 55.5% of respondents are the Travel factors intended to use mobile
wallet were most preferred and preferred by the college students.
 47.7% of respondents are the Gift factors intended to use mobile wallet were
not preferred and least preferred by the college students
 Majority 59.3% of respondents are the Recharge factors intended to use
mobile wallet were most preferred and preferred by the college students.
 44.0% of respondents are the Financial Services factors intended to use
mobile wallet were most preferred and preferred by the college students.
  Majority 57.9% of respondents are the Shopping factors intended to use
mobile wallet were most preferred and preferred by the college students.
 Majority 68.0% of respondents are the Grocery factors intended to use mobile
wallet were most preferred and preferred by the college students.
 Majority 56.5% of respondents are the Restaurant factors intended to use
mobile wallet were most preferred and preferred by the college students.
 Majority 54.6% of respondents are the Credit/ Debit factors intended to use
mobile wallet were most preferred and preferred by the college students.
 41.7% of respondents are the City Services factors intended to use mobile
wallet were most preferred and preferred by the college students.
SUGGESTIONS
 The future of mobile payments in INDIA depends largely on the payment bank
license which is to be provided by RBI so that the consumers will get confidence in
using the wallet services. All the Mobile wallet providers need to meet the guidelines
stipulated by RBI, so as to acquire payment bank license.
 The awareness of M-wallet providers is rising when compared to the preference of
usage of services, therefore the reasons for not using M-wallet can be found.
However, security concerns appear to be an important factor depressing the adoption
of mobile wallets for payments.
 Therefore the mobile wallet providers need to address the security and privacy
concerns of the users. Mobile wallet providers can collaborate with the “Telcos” for
better and fast network connectivity.
CONCLUSION
The study was accomplished to explore consumer awareness, preferences and
willingness to engage in using a smart phone to replace the content of their physical wallets.
With the increased penetration of internet connectivity and smart phones has led to an
increase in the number of M-wallet users. M-wallet is getting more and more -trendier among
the consumers. As per the findings of the study, M-wallet is getting popularity among the
young lots such as college students and scholars. Further the study also explored which M-
wallet gateway services are preferred by the college students. The study witnessed that paytm
is leading among the other wallet providers. When a user is making an online payment via M-
wallets, the respondents are affected by various assorted factors. One of the prime obstacle is
security issues, due to which the users gets anxious about his or her confidential information
which may get disclosed. Therefore the M-wallet providers need to understand and meet or
even exceed towards the users trust expectations. This includes not only addressing security
and privacy concerns but also safeguarding the backup mechanism if the phone is lost or
stolen. The study mainly focused on awareness, preferences and satisfaction of the services
used that affect the consumer’s behavior intension towards M-wallets. M-wallet’s are
growing in INDIA as the consumers are relying upon the digital life style to make things
convenient and faster and the consumers are embracing M-wallet with open arms.
REFERENCES

1. Nikita Rai, Anurag Ashok, Janhvi Chakraborty, Prajakta Arolker, Saumeel Gajera
(2012), “M-wallet: An SMS based payment system”, International Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications, ISSN: 2248-9622.
2. Neeharika P et al, (2014), “A Novel Interoperable Mobile Wallet Model with
Capability Based Access Control Framework”, International Journal of Computer
Science and Mobile Computing, Vol.3 Issue 7, pg. 888.904