The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-2323.htm
IJBM
36,7
1386
Received 8 October 2017
Revised 7 December 2017
2 January 2018
Accepted 2 January 2018
International Journal of Bank
Marketing
Vol. 36 No. 7, 2018
pp. 1386-1413
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0265-2323
DOI 10.1108/IJBM-10-2017-0215
Mobile-banking adoption:
empirical evidence from the
banking sector in Pakistan
Maya F. Farah
Department of Marketing, School of Business, Lebanese American University,
Byblos, Lebanon
Muhammad Junaid Shahid Hasni
Department of Economics and Management,
Helsingin Yliopisto Maatalous-Metsatieteellinen Tiedekunta, Helsinki, Finland, and
Abbas Khan Abbas
Department of Management Sciences, University of Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to study the important factors which help explain consumer intention
and use behavior in mobile banking (m-banking) adoption. All constructs of the unified theory of acceptance
and use of technology 2 are studied. Non-monetary value is studied through perceived value. Trust and
perceived risk are also included to predict intention.
Design/methodology/approach – A questionnaire was utilized to evaluate customer responses on a
five-point Likert scale. A convenience sampling technique was used to collect data from a sample of 490
respondents in Pakistan. The data were analyzed using AMOS and SPSS for Cronbach’s α, CR, CMV, AVE,
Harmon’s single factor test, correlation and structural equation modeling.
Findings – The results of the study show that most of the predictors of intention, including perceived value,
performance expectancy, habit, social influence, effort expectancy, hedonic motivation (except for facilitating
condition), perceived risk and trust, are significant. All predictors of usage behavior are significant.
Research limitations/implications – A cross-sectional study was conducted due to time constraints.
Practical implications – Bank managers must focus on improving customers’ intentions to use m-banking
as well as on providing facilitating conditions to increase its actual use. To boost mobile banking, banks’
management must consider the customers’ habits while designing their m-banking products.
Originality/value – The findings of this paper are not only interesting in terms of boosting m-banking
diffusion rate, but also in terms of financial inclusion of the vast majority of mobile users. Further the impact
of intention, facilitating condition and habit were checked on actual use behavior since people tend not always
to act upon their intentions.
Keywords Pakistan, Intention, Bank customers, M-banking, UTAUT2, Use behaviour
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Traditionally, banks have adopted the brick-and-mortar approach in order to expand
geographically and capture a larger market share (Tan and Teo, 2000). Nevertheless, ever
since the 1990s, the banking sector has started to shift from its traditional financial delivery
mediums toward autonomous, self-service delivery channels (Pikkarainen et al., 2004). This
movement has been fueled by the advent of the internet, which allowed banks to opt for the
latter revolutionary approach, thereby enabling greater market access and reach (Tan and
Teo, 2000). Indeed, and due to its highly competitive nature, the banking industry has
remained a leader when it comes to the adoption of new technologies such as the internet
(Luo et al., 2010). These contemporary technological innovations have significantly
benefitted the commercial sector, allowing banks to provide better services to customers
(Afshan and Sharif, 2016). For example, modern telecommunication and networking
technologies led to the development of automated teller machines (ATMs), which have
facilitated and simplified consumer banking transactions (Adesuyi et al., 2013).
 ATMs marked the beginning of the banking self-services era that was later followed by the Mobile-banking
advent of mobile banking (m-banking): a new stage that offered even greater convenience to adoption
end-users (Afshan and Sharif, 2016). M-banking is a new form of electronic banking
technology that enables a consumer to directly interact with his/her bank and access financial
services through a mobile device, such as a smartphone (Chawla and Joshi, 2017). The first
m-banking services enabled consumers to complete bill payments and inquire about their
account balance via SMS (Laukkanen and Lauronen, 2005). Today, m-banking allows 1387
customers to access a wide variety of banking services, such as account transfers, money
deposits and virtual payment completion (Gu et al., 2009).
M-banking is a specific form of internet banking; both offer to consumers similar
characteristics and facilities, yet m-banking presents the added convenience of immediate
access at any given location (Singh, 2014). M-banking applications facilitate the ability to
complete many services in the absence of an internet connection while internet banking
services require such a connection to function (Laukkanen, 2007; Khan and Khan, 2012).
Thakur (2014) indicated that m-banking provides more convenience to customers than other
forms of self-service banking options since it presents no restrictions on time and place
(Gu et al., 2009). As a result, m-banking has not only improved clients’ relationships with
their banks, but has also increased the efficiency of individual banking services as a whole
(Lin, 2011; Malaquias and Hwang, 2016). Moreover, m-banking enables the extension of
financial and non-financial banking services to customers in all areas, including those with
minimal access to physical banks (Shaikh and Karjaluoto, 2015).
Initially, m-banking was considered a fashionable trend or fad that failed to garner mass
acceptance and adoption; however, consumers today are more interested in m-banking,
thereby paving the way for its long-term acceptance and institutionalization (Moser, 2015).
This is in large part attributed to the fact that mobile phone subscriptions are on the rise
globally. Indeed, the Groupe Speciale Mobile Association (2017a) revealed that, as of late
2016, more than 4.8bn unique mobile subscribers existed, with approximately 7.9bn SIM
connections noted across the globe; this number is expected to surpass 5.7bn subscribers by
the year 2020.
Nonetheless, m-banking today is still at its initial stages of adoption and the concept
requires more research, especially within developing countries that have been slow to accept
such advances (Laukkanen, 2007). This study aims to study m-banking adoption in
Pakistan, where the service was introduced as recently as 2009 (Mustafa and Waheed, 2016).
Interestingly, Pakistan holds approximately 139m unique mobile subscribers, accounting
for more than 54 percent of the nation’s population (State Bank of Pakistan, 2016); this
number is expected to rise by an 17m new subscribers by the year 2020 (Groupe Speciale
Mobile Association, 2017b). As a result, Pakistan ranks eighth globally with respect to the
number of mobile users (Afshan and Sharif, 2016); however, the number of registered
m-banking users within the nation is only 1.6m (Shaikh and Karjaluoto, 2015). These usage
figures indicate noticeable consumer reluctance toward m-banking adoption in Pakistan.
Therefore, this study aims to investigate the factors behind consumer m-banking adoption
intention (BI) and offer recommendations to help boost the rate of m-banking in the country.
Indeed, the existing literature lacks models that thoroughly explain consumer intentions
regarding m-banking adoption in developing nations (Dajani and Yaseen, 2016; Chawla and
Joshi, 2017). The extant literature highlights the need to conduct studies on m-banking
adoption across different cultures and specifically within developing nations that include a
large number of rural areas (Oliveira et al., 2014; Baptista and Oliveira, 2015; Tam and
Oliveira, 2017), such as Pakistan, which can benefit significantly from this type of banking.
To date, and to the best of the researchers’ knowledge, no studies have utilized the unified
theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) theory to assess m-BI in Pakistan.
Nevertheless, it is of great importance to conduct studies in underdeveloped nations such as
IJBM Pakistan since m-banking can foster financial inclusion, enhance the banking system and
36,7 boost overall economic development (Mullan et al., 2017).
Moreover, the majority of existing studies focus on mobile commerce and online banking
with little attention on the usage and customer acceptance of m-banking (Chandio et al.,
2013; Chawla and Joshi, 2017). In addition, the vast majority of extant literature discusses
the external factors influencing m-banking with little analysis of the behavioral reasons
1388 impacting consumer m-BI (Wessels and Drennan, 2010; Goswami, 2017). Indeed, Yu (2012)
highlighted the need for studies that further examine the behavioral factors impacting
consumers’ m-banking adoption.
Furthermore, research on m-banking is fragmented and based on different theoretical
frameworks (Shaikh and Karjaluoto, 2015). Many theories and models have been devised to
understand individual behavioral intention with regard to technology usage, including the
technology acceptance model (TAM) (Davis et al., 1989), TAM2 (Venkatesh, 2000), TAM3
(Venkatesh and Bala, 2008), UTAUT and UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al., 2003, 2012). However, few
studies have analyzed m-banking adoption based on these theories (Yu, 2012; Tam and Oliveira,
2016; Tan and Lau, 2016). Notably, the vast majority of studies related to m-banking adoption
have utilized the TAM theory, thereby signifying the importance of utilizing other theories in
order to cover any possible knowledge gaps (Tam and Oliveira, 2017); likewise, researchers
have suggested that future research must employ the updated UTAUT2 to further comprehend
consumer intentions with regard to m-banking (Oliveira et al., 2014; Thakur, 2014). Moreover,
most studies using the UTAUT and UTAUT2 employ these models in relation to moderating
factors such as age, gender and experience (Yu, 2012; Baptista and Oliveira, 2015), with few
studies attempting to expand the theory itself to further enhance its accuracy. In addition,
m-banking research highlights the fact that most studies and theories solely assess m-banking
relative to adoption intention; in turn, Koksal (2016) emphasized the importance of conducting
future studies that additionally measure the causality between m-BI and actual behavior itself.
Therefore, this study will adapt the UTAUT2 theory and examine the impact of each of
its constructs on a consumer’s intention to adopt m-banking facilities within the Pakistani
context and the impact of intention on actual behavior itself. This study will help banking
managers understand consumers’ perceptions and intentions with regard to m-banking,
thereby ultimately enabling banks to access a greater customer base and increase their
overall revenues.

2. Literature review
M-banking
M-banking refers to any “product or service offered by a bank or a microfinance institute
[…] for conducting financial and non-financial transactions using a mobile device, namely a
mobile phone, Smartphone, or tablet” (Shaikh and Karjaluoto, 2015, p. 5). This form of
banking is considered a revolutionary advancement that combines mobile technological
advances with financial and commercial services (Bharti, 2016). M-banking services are
provided through various channels, with the most popular being downloadable
applications, SMS and interactive voice response (Shankar and Kumari, 2016).
M-banking is an equipment-centric form of self-service technology that allows
consumers to access various banking services at any time and place through the
convenience of their own mobile device (Tam and Oliveira, 2017). These applications offer a
variety of services to users, allowing them to check their balance, pay bills, obtain account
information, transfer money, complete in-store purchases, access bank statements and even
make stock investments (Rahmani et al., 2012). These applications offer significant
advantages to both the bank and the consumer (Tam and Oliveira, 2017). M-banking is
deemed highly important to banking institutions because it presents banks with the
opportunity to expand their services to all areas, enhances their competitive advantage,
offers value-added services to bank consumers and allows for a modern and interactive Mobile-banking
channel of communication with the consumer (Amin et al., 2008). M-banking thus provides adoption
institutions with opportunities to reach rural areas and developing markets that are
otherwise hard and costly to access (Ha et al., 2012). M-banking also offers customers
various advantages, including real-time mobility, usefulness, adaptability, security,
interactivity and overall universality (Laukkanen, 2007). Nevertheless, consumers have
displayed low adoption rates of the latter applications, which has fueled the need for studies 1389
that understand the behavioral constructs behind consumer m-banking adoption
(Laukkanen and Pasanen, 2008; Illia et al., 2015).

Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology

In order to understand the rationale behind consumer behavioral adoption intention,
researchers advise using UTAUT theory, which presents the most inclusive theoretical
model for intention assessment (Tai and Ku, 2013). The UTAUT model was developed to
offer a cross-validated framework that explains an individual’s intention to adopt new
technologies across various organizational and societal contexts (Celik, 2016). The UTAUT
was developed based on eight TAMs/theories: theory of reasoned action, TAM/TAM2,
motivation model, theory of planned behavior, combined TAM and TPB, model of PC
utilization, innovation diffusion theory and social cognitive theory (Venkatesh et al., 2003).
Thus, this theory integrates both psychological and behavioral theories to absorb the
drawbacks of each (Wong and Huang, 2011); it combines variables from each of the
aforementioned theories and refines them to offer an empirically supported model that
allows researchers to examine all the core determinants of technology adoption intention
(Yu, 2012). Interestingly, research shows that the more widely used TAM theory explains
only 40 percent of usage intention while the UTAUT theory predicts more than 70 percent of
adoption intention, thus holding greater statistical and explanatory power (Yun et al., 2013).
The original UTAUT dictates that four variables impact individuals’ acceptance of
technology and their overall intention to adopt it: performance expectancy, effort
expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions (Venkatesh et al., 2003). When the
UTAUT2 theory was later improved, three new variables were added: habit, hedonic
motivation and price sensitivity (Kumar et al., 2012; Venkatesh et al., 2012; Baptista and
Oliveira, 2016). Consequently, the strength and accuracy of this theory stem from the fact
that it incorporates individual, technological and environmental constructs to understand
the drivers behind individual adoption intention (Nwagwu and Akeem, 2013). Indeed, the
UTAUT2 garners greater strength since it includes hedonic variables in addition to the
utilitarian constructs addressed by the original UTAUT (Lua et al., 2016). Nevertheless,
researchers have recently recommended that this theory incorporate trust and perceived
risk to increase its predictive power and allow for a more rounded understanding of
technology adoption as a concept (Luo et al., 2010; Zhou et al., 2010; Martins et al., 2014). This
study will therefore assess the impact of each of these nine variables on m-BI.

Performance expectancy and m-banking

The first UTAUT construct, performance expectancy, is defined as a consumer’s belief that
the usage of a certain technology will enhance his/her overall performance and it
incorporates perceived usefulness, external motivation, outcome expectations, comparative
advantage and job fit (Tai and Ku, 2013). Performance expectancy reflects an individual’s
awareness that a technology causes enhancements in service performance, be it through
augmented response rate, efficiency and/or accessibility (Chiao-Chen, 2013). Many
researchers consider this variable to be one of the most significant determinants of
individual behavioral intentions (Fakhoury and Baker, 2016). Therefore, a consumer is more
likely to adopt m-banking services if he/she perceives that these services will ease and
IJBM expedite their banking transactions when compared to other banking facilities (Tan and
36,7 Lau, 2016). Yang and Forney (2013) found that mobile applications increase flexibility,
conserve time, enable customization and allow for effective access to information, thereby
increasing a consumer’s perceived performance expectancy. Consequently, the greater an
individual’s belief that m-banking adoption will enhance his/her performance, the greater
the likelihood that he/she will embrace the usage of these services (Mbrokoh, 2016).
1390 Accordingly, the researchers posit:
H1. Performance expectancy will have a significant positive impact on m-BI.

Effort expectancy and m-banking

The next construct, effort expectancy, is defined as the level of ease an individual associates
with the usage of a certain technology (Yu, 2012); accordingly, it specifies how much effort is
needed to learn how to handle this technology (Tai and Ku, 2013). This construct
incorporates perceived ease of use, methodical complexity and usage simplicity (Maduku,
2015) and is determined by multiple factors, such as usefulness, flexibility, user friendliness
and overall navigation facilities (Chiwara et al., 2017).
Consumers have been shown to display high levels of intention when effort expectancy is
high, especially in the early stages of product/service adoption (Chiao-Chen, 2013).
A consumer is more likely to adopt a service if he/she expects that these applications are
easy to use and require little exertion (Park et al., 2007), especially in the case of self-service
technologies, such as m-banking, which require consumers to complete their transactions
independent of any assistance (Alalwan et al., 2015). Indeed, ease of navigation is one of the
most prominent benefits linked with m-banking applications since they facilitate banking
transactions with no need to visit the physical bank itself, thereby requiring minimal effort
(Sampaio et al., 2017). Thus, the researchers hypothesize:
H2. Effort expectancy will have a significant positive impact on m-BI.

Social influence and m-banking

The third original UTAUT construct, social influence, is an individual’s perception that
significant others in his/her life think that he/she should adopt a given technology
(Yu, 2012). It is founded upon the concepts of subjective norms and social image whereby an
individual is considered likely to acquire behaviors accepted and selected by his/her social
peers and important others (Tan et al., 2010; Mbrokoh, 2016). Concerning an individual’s
behavioral intentions, it is evident that social expectations are influenced by subjective
norms (Farah, 2017a) as such influences shape individual beliefs and behaviors while also
alleviating uncertainty and fears regarding the adoption of a new service (Illia et al., 2015).
Indeed, studies have dictated that social influence is especially significant when it comes
to the user’s adoption of technology, such as m-banking applications (Patel, 2016). Social
norms and influences are also notable in the case of individuals with limited experience with
a new technology since referee opinions become one of the main determinants of intention
(Mbrokoh, 2016). This is especially true in the case of mobile applications, which are viewed
as part of a larger online social network, thereby intensifying the impact of important
others’ opinions (Yu, 2012). On a similar note, individuals are likely to depend greatly on
referent feedback and experiences with m-banking applications prior to adoption since the
latter is a comparatively new banking medium (Yang and Forney, 2013). Therefore,
normative influences are likely to encourage consumer intentions regarding m-banking and
thus facilitate the acceptance and adoption of such services (Nysveen, 2005). Therefore, the
researchers postulate:
H3. Social influence will have a significant positive impact on m-BI.
Facilitating conditions and m-banking Mobile-banking
Facilitating conditions are the extent to which an individual perceives that existing external adoption
and internal environmental factors overpower technological barriers and assist in the
acceptance of new technologies (Nel et al., 2012); they point out the availability of, and
accessibility to, resources that promote the adoption of a given behavior (Siddik et al., 2014).
This construct is based upon a number of variables, including perceived behavioral control,
work style compatibility and external facilitating conditions (Yu, 2012). Facilitating 1391
conditions offer an individual a sense of psychological control that in turn impacts his/her
willingness to adopt a certain behavior (Nel et al., 2012); they are largely influenced by an
individual’s cultural, social and technological backgrounds as well as his/her perceptions
and beliefs (Mullan et al., 2017). Understandably, an individual is unlikely to adopt
m-banking services unless he/she possesses certain facilitating conditions, namely: financial
resources, skills needed to operate these applications/services and a working mobile
connection (Chemingui and Hajer, 2013). Thus, the researchers stipulate:
H4. Facilitating conditions will have a significant positive impact on m-BI.

Habit and m-banking

Habit is defined as the degree to which an individual performs a certain behavior
automatically and repetitively based on experience and knowledge acquired over time
(Alalwan et al., 2015). A consumer is unlikely to change an obtained habit and, therefore, is
likely to resist any new and unfamiliar interactions with his/her bank (Chemingui and Hajer,
2013); this in turn generates consumer hesitation to adopt new applications and services
such as m-banking (Antón et al., 2013). In fact, past experience and habit tend to become an
unconscious element that can significantly inhibit consumers’ willingness to learn new
methods since they are likely to rely on past experience when making a decision instead of
utilizing cognitive reasoning (Venkatesh et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2017).
Similarly, consumers who utilize offline banking are familiar with the habits and abilities
needed to conduct offline transactions whereas they need to develop new habits and skills to
utilize m-banking applications (Hanafizadeh et al., 2013). In fact, studies indicate that
individuals are habitually inclined to human encounters in the case of banking and are thus
less willing to adopt online banking services (Laukkanen and Pasanen, 2008). Thus, previous
research has identified habit as one of the main barriers to individuals’ new technology
adoption as it significantly impacts consumers’ preferences and intentions (Moorthy et al.,
2017). Accordingly, the researchers posit:
H5. Habit will have a significant negative impact on m-BI.

Hedonic motivation and m-banking

The next UTAUT2 construct is hedonic motivation, which is defined as the level of pleasure
and joy gained from using a technology (Brown and Venkatesh, 2005). Hedonic impulses are
non-functional and emotional in nature and are based on an individual’s affective needs
(Malik et al., 2013). The pleasure and enjoyment derived from using a new technology plays
a significant role in enhancing a consumer’s adoption intentions (Alalwan et al., 2015).
Moreover, studies have shown that the usage of interactive services, such as m-banking
applications, is not only based on functional motivations, but is also largely driven by
hedonic needs and values (Malaquias and Hwang, 2016). Likewise, Curran and Meuter
(2007) indicated that hedonic motives tend to be prominent determinants in a consumer’s
likelihood to adopt self-service technologies.
Indeed, Arcand et al. (2017) indicated that mobile devices are generally associated with
enjoyment; thus, m-banking applications tend be viewed as sources of entertainment and
IJBM pleasure, especially when the design and visual characteristics of an application and its overall
36,7 layout are deemed to be aesthetically pleasing (Hausman and Siepke, 2009). Moreover, visual
application elements (e.g. color, music, animation, and font) can all augment a consumer’s
experiential evaluation and evoke feelings of happiness and gratification (Sahoo and Pillai,
2017). Therefore, an individual is motivated to adopt m-banking services that gratify his/her
aesthetic and emotional needs (Li et al., 2012). Consequently, the researchers hypothesize:
1392 H6. Hedonic motivation will have a significant negative impact on m-BI.

Perceived value and m-banking

The final original UTAUT2 construct is price sensitivity or an individual’s degree of price
elasticity and awareness incorporated by Venkatesh et al. (2012). However, and for the
purpose of this study, price sensitivity as a construct is replaced with perceived value
because the majority of m-banking services and applications are free (Streeter, 2009; Al-Jabri
and Sohail, 2012) and perceived value incorporates both monetary and non-monetary value
allowing for a more rounded analysis (Gao and Bai, 2014).
Perceived value is an individual’s evaluation of a product’s overall worth through a
comparison of its expected benefits vs its expected costs (Zhu et al., 2010). The perceived
value of m-banking applications includes a consumer’s subjective perception of the
application’s utilitarian and hedonic advantages, including its functionality, enjoyment,
interactivity, accessibility, service quality and overall usefulness (Arcand et al., 2017).
A consumer is likely to adopt a technology that maximizes subjective value and presents
him/her with the greatest advantages (Dootson et al., 2016).
Indeed, high perceived value alleviates individual fears and increases the chances of
post-usage satisfaction (Amoroso and Magnier-Watanabe, 2012); as a result, it is considered
one of the main causes of individual technology adoption and usage intention (Okazaki et al.,
2015). Notably, an individual is likely to believe that m-banking applications create an added
value for him/her due to their versatile nature and customizable services (Awasthi and
Sangle, 2013). Thus, the researchers posit:
H7. Perceived value will have a significant positive impact on m-BI.

Trust and m-banking

The current study will incorporate trust as an additional UTAUT variable. Trust is an
individual’s perception that a service will consistently meet his/her expectations, and it
demonstrates an individual’s likelihood to continuously rely upon a service and its
characteristics (Xin et al., 2015; Koksal, 2016). Trust is developed based upon three distinct
characteristics: a service’s ability to accomplish the required tasks successfully, integrity to
fulfill its claims ethically with no deception and benevolence to care about customers’ needs
(Zhou, 2011). Developing individual trust is essential since it decreases consumers’ concerns
and doubts, thereby reducing the decision complexity and enhancing adoption intentions
(Luo et al., 2010; Koksal, 2016).
Trust is an especially important construct in the case of new self-service technologies
because these applications lack personal interaction and are related to financial matters
that tend to be sensitive in nature (Alalwan et al., 2015). M-banking’s lack of personal
interaction is a crucial issue for customer loyalty because, when personal interaction is
absent, customers’ openness to switching banks may increase (Farah, 2017b). Sahoo and
Pillai (2017) indicated that individuals’ trust in an m-banking application is likely to
increase their sense of perceived security, which is considered one of the main drivers of
consumers’ online satisfaction. Consumer trust will further amplify the perceived benefits
and values of m-banking, thereby minimizing individual concerns (Alalwan et al., 2016).
Thus, trust is considered a critical motivator of consumer m-BIs (Shankar and Kumari, Mobile-banking
2016). Accordingly, the researchers deduce: adoption
H8. Trust will have a significant positive impact on m-BI.

Perceived risk and m-banking

The final variable to be incorporated into the UTAUT model is perceived risk, which is 1393
defined as an individual’s degree of expected uncertainty associated with the result of using
a certain technology (Tan and Lau, 2016). It includes five main groupings: service
performance, monetary, time, societal and security risks ( Jacoby and Kaplan, 1972;
Mha, 2015). Perceived risks in turn increase consumer hesitation and generate negative
attitudes toward a service (Kalaiarasi and Srividya, 2012). This breeds a sense of anxiety
and unease that in turn decreases the perceived value and usefulness of a technology,
thereby diminishing adoption intentions (Kumar et al., 2012). Indeed, electronic banking
applications are associated with high perceived risks because consumers fear the exchange
of personal financial information and services through online applications (Kazi and
Mannan, 2013). Moreover, studies have indicated that a high degree of perceived risk and
insecurity is generally associated with mobile devices as people dread the loss or theft of
these appliances and the information they hold (Hanafizadeh et al., 2013; Arcand et al., 2017).
Studies have also found that consumers fear the uncertainty associated with mobile
applications, including system errors, software problems, connection troubles and third-
party hacking (Tai and Ku, 2013). Therefore, high risks will significantly reduce an
individual’s likelihood to adopt m-banking technologies (Sripalawat et al., 2011).
Accordingly, the researchers deduce:
H9. Perceived risk will have a significant negative impact on m-BI.

Adoption intention and usage behavior

A consumer’s adoption intention is a highly important area of study because it can directly
predict an individual’s actual technology usage behavior (Yu, 2012). Behavioral intentions
tend to mediate the relationship between behavioral variables and the actual
implementation of the behavior itself, thereby causing intentions to forecast future
actions accurately (Baker et al., 2007). Indeed, adoption intentions demonstrate an
individual’s inclination and likelihood to execute a certain behavior ( Jogiyanto, 2007);
likewise, usage intentions shape consumer opinions and are believed to be a direct precedent
to the actual behavior itself (Arahita and Hatammimi, 2015). Researchers have
demonstrated that technology usage is largely initiated by an individual’s behavioral
intentions and evaluations (Hong et al., 2008; Venkatesh et al., 2012). Consequently, the
researchers posit:
H10. Adoption intention will have a positive significant effect on m-banking
usage behavior.

Theoretical framework
The present study incorporates all the UTAUT2 factors and further extends the theory by
adding two factors: trust and perceived risk. Furthermore, the original price sensitivity
variable was replaced by perceived value, as previously discussed, to allow for a more
accurate analysis of adoption intention relative to m-banking services. The new proposed
model (see Figure 1) aims to increase the predictive power and reliability of the existing
theory. The figure illustrates all the developed hypotheses (H1–H10) between each of the
aforementioned variables – performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence,
IJBM Performance
Expectancy H1
36,7
Effort Expectancy
H2

Social Influence H3

Facilitating Condition H4
1394
Habit H5 Mobile banking H10 Use Behavior
adoption Intention
H6
Hedonic Motivation
H7
Perceived Value
H8
Trust
H9

Perceived Risk

Figure 1.
Conceptual model Sources: Modified from Venkatesh et al. (2003, 2012); Kim et al. (2007, 2008) and Martins et al.
(2014)

facilitating conditions, habit, hedonic motivation, perceived value, trust, perceived

risk – and m-BI as well as the relationship between adoption intention and actual
m-banking usage behavior.

3. Methodology
Research design and instrument
A quantitative study was conducted to grasp a precise understanding of how the discussed
behavioral factors impact customer adoption intention and subsequent usage behavior with
regard to m-banking. The researchers designed a structured questionnaire to obtain the
response from the targeted population, which required 10–15 min to complete. The first part of
the questionnaire consists of three demographic questions linked to gender, age and duration
of one’s relationship with the bank. The second part of the questionnaire employed a series of
multi-item scales to measure the interrelationships between each of the m-banking factors –
namely, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions,
habit, hedonic motivation, perceived value, trust and perceived risk – and adoption intention.

Instrument
The current study utilized a quantitative questionnaire to accurately measure the impact of
the various behavioral factors on consumer m-BIs and their subsequent usage behavior.
The empirical survey employed a series of multi-item scales to measure each variable and
assess the interrelationships between the factors. To maintain content validity, all survey
scales were adapted from academically validated scales (Glavee-Geo et al., 2017); in
accordance with extant literature, the scale wording was adapted to better fit this study’s
exact context (Straub et al., 2004; Glavee-Geo et al., 2017).
The first question assessed consumer m-BI and incorporated a three-item scale devised
from a scale adapted from Venkatesh et al. (2003) and based upon the original behavioral
intention scale utilized by Davis et al. (1989). Davis et al.’s scale is highly regarded by
researchers and considered one of the most popular measures of individual behavioral
intention (Rawashdeh, 2015); it utilizes a five-point Likert scale with endpoints 1 ¼ strongly
disagree and 5 ¼ strongly agree.
 The following scale measures consumer performance expectancy, employing a four-item Mobile-banking
scale derived from Venkatesh et al.’s (2003) validated scale. This scale assesses an adoption
individual’s belief that m-banking will improve performance, save time, facilitate ubiquitous
access and provide overall usefulness to him/her (Shih-Wei, 2010). Respondents indicate
their agreement with each statement on a five-point Likert scale.
Next, a four-item scale is utilized to measure effort expectancy based on an original scale
generated by Venkatesh et al. (2003), whose scale was validated by researchers and is 1395
considered one of the most prominent measures of effort expectancy (Yeow and Loo, 2009).
The scale was adapted to assess an individual’s expectancy with regard to m-banking
services’ ease of use and employed a five-point Likert scale.
The subsequent section included a four-item measure of social influence adapted from
Venkatesh et al.’s (2003) original scale to measure the degree to which an individual’s
decision to adopt m-banking services is influenced by his/her important others (Chan et al.,
2010). Respondents were asked to evaluate their agreement with each statement on a five-
point Likert scale.
Likewise, the ensuing four-item scale utilized to measure facilitating conditions was also
adapted from original scales devised by Venkatesh et al. (2003), whose five-point Likert scale
has been widely used in assessing facilitating conditions. The scale determines the degree to
which an individual’s m-banking usage is facilitated by his/her living and working
environment (Yu, 2012).
The succeeding section evaluates individual hedonic motivation through the
employment of a three-item scale based on Kim et al.’s (2005) scale. This scale was
adapted to measure the degree to which an individual perceives m-banking services to be
fun, entertaining and enjoyable on a five-point Likert scale.
The survey respondents were asked to use a three-item scale to assess habit based upon
Limayem and Hirt’s (2003) and Limayem et al.’s (2007) substantiated scale. This five-point
Likert scale, which offers a self-reported measure of individuals’ habits and past behaviors,
has been proven to be highly reflective of the extent to which a given behavior is automated
in nature (Verplanken and Orbell, 2003).
The ensuing section incorporated a four-item, five-point Likert scale to measure individual
m-banking perceived value based on a scale utilized by Kim et al. (2007) and developed by
Sirdeshmukh et al. (2002). The latter is a popular multi-dimensional measure of individual
perceived value of a service relative to time, effort, price and overall value (Chen, 2013).
Next, a three-item scale assessing respondent trust was derived from Kim et al.’s (2008)
scale that was originally based upon Morgan and Hunt’s (1994) scale. This five-point Likert
scale is highly regarded in the marketing literature because it allows participants to assess
trust relative to their assessment of a product’s/service’s honesty, trustworthiness and
integrity (Farah and Ramadan, 2017).
Respondents were next asked to indicate their agreement with a three-point Likert scale
(1 ¼ strongly disagree, 3 ¼ strongly agree) to gauge their individual levels of perceived
risk. This scale was adopted from Kim et al.’s (2008) scale, which was based upon an original
validated scale devised by Jarvenpaa et al. (2000). This scale has been widely adopted as it
measures an individual’s perception of risk, financial risk and overall risk levels when
compared to other alternatives – in this case, traditional banking (Pavlou and Gefen, 2004).
The final section within this questionnaire included a unidimensional scale assessing
individual usage behavior through a self-reported measure of use. The latter form of assessment
was employed since research indicates that, when it comes to actual usage behavior,
self-reported questions tend to display high objectivity and accuracy (Barnett et al., 2007).
The question utilized a five-point Likert scale with endpoints 1 ¼ never and 5 ¼ all the time.
A pilot study was conducted to administer the questionnaire to 15 bank customers, all
acquaintances of the researcher. The purpose of this stage was to note any comprehension
IJBM or wording problems and ensure that any errors were duly rectified prior to data collection
36,7 in order to maintain validity and reliability (Carlson and Chan, 2011). The pilot study found
no major problems in terms of wording and structure; the questionnaire was deemed easy to
understand and complete and required only a few minor phrasing modifications.

Sample
1396 The population of our research includes all banking customers in Pakistan. Due to time and
resource constraints, a convenience non-probability sampling approach was used in the
present study, which is consistent with other similar studies (Luarn and Lin, 2005; Wu and
Wang, 2005; Afshan and Sharif, 2016). Questionnaires were distributed at the branches of
five selected banks, chosen based on size and popularity – Bank of Punjab, Muslim
Commercial Bank Limited, Bank Al Habib Limited, National Bank of Pakistan and
United Bank Limited – in four of the largest cities of Pakistan: Rawalpindi, Islamabad,
Lahore and Sargodha. The permission to approach bank consumers was requested from
each of the bank’s branch managers prior to data collection. Data were collected over three
months, from August until October 2016; bank customers were approached in person and
asked to fill out the self-administered questionnaires.
Ultimately, 490 questionnaires were distributed among customers across the different
Pakistani banks; 385 completed questionnaires were received (Mishra and Bisht, 2013) from
232 male respondents and 136 females. The majority of respondents were 21–30 years old
(61.1 percent). The sample showed an equal distribution across the various cities:
28.5 percent in Rawalpindi, 24.2 percent in Islamabad, 20.1 percent in Lahore and
27.2 percent in Sargodha. Approximately 50 percent of the sample had a one-to-five-year
relationship with their banks. Table I offers a detailed description of the respondents’
demographic characteristics.

4. Results
Data analysis tools and techniques
SPSS and AMOS were used to carry out the tests related to reliability and structural
equation modeling (SEM) (Luo et al., 2010; Awasthi and Sangle, 2013; Thakur, 2014). SEM
was chosen because it is a powerful assessment tool that provides strong evidence of model
fit and further provides the ability to test the effect of latent variables that is not possible in
other techniques (Chin et al., 2008), because other techniques mostly take mean values for
data analysis and hide the issues if any have items loadings.

Measurement model
The measurement model was developed followed by an analysis of the structural
model, which is consistent with other studies (Venkatesh et al., 2012; Hew et al., 2015).
A confirmatory factor analysis was carried out using AMOS to test the measurement model.
Different indices, including comparative fit index (CFI), relative χ2 (CMIN/df ), root mean
square residual (RMR) and goodness of fit (GFI), were considered to determine the data’s
appropriateness. The CMIN/df value was 1.219, which is below 3 as per Kline’s (1998)
recommendation. The GFI, AGFI and CFI values were sample sensitive. In the context of
this study, all the employed fit indices achieved the cut-off values (AGFI ¼ 0.904,
CFI ¼ 0.98, GFI ¼ 0.92, CMIN/df ¼ 1.219, RMSEA ¼ 0.055, RMR ¼ 0.045 and TLI
¼ 0.921), indicating that the data fit the model well.
To ensure that the measurements were reliable and valid, all UTAUT constructs and
other study variables were tested for convergent validity and discriminant validity. Sekaran
and Bougie (2011, p. 160) defined convergent validity as the value “established when the
scores obtained with two different instruments measuring the same concept are highly
Standardized path coefficients Frequency Percentage
Mobile-banking
adoption
Gender
Male 232 63
Female 136 37
Age (in years)
Up to 20 92 25 1397
21–30 225 61.10
31–40 28 7.60
41–50 14 3.80
Above 50 9 2.40
Education
Primary 9 2.40
Secondary 27 7.30
Higher Secondary 25 6.80
Undergraduate/Bachelor Degree 20 5.40
Master 146 39.70
MPhil 133 36.10
Doctoral Degree 8 2.20
City
Islamabad 105 28.50
Rawalpindi 89 24.20
Lahore 74 20.10
Sargodha 100 27.20
Bank
BOPa 98 26.60
MCBb 62 16.80
BAHLb 109 29.60
NBPa 52 14.10
UBLb 47 12.80
Relationship with Bank (in year)
Less than 1 147 39.90
1–5 184 50 Table I.
Above 5 37 10.10 Survey respondents’
Notes: NBP, National Bank of Pakistan; BOP, Bank of Punjab; MCB, Muslim Commercial Bank Limited; demographic
BAHL, Bank AL Habib Limited; UBL, United Bank Limited. aPublic; bPrivate characteristics

correlated.” Meanwhile, convergent validity measures the extent to which two or more
items/factors agree. Convergent validity was established using a two-step approach:
(1) according to Bagozzi and Yi (1988), composite reliability (CR) for all variables must
be above 0.60; and
(2) the average variance extracted (AVE) values should be above 0.50, as suggested by
both Kline (1998) and Hair et al. (1998).
As shown in Table II, all the measures display CR and Cronbach’s α reliability values
greater than 0.7 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988; Nunnally, 1978), indicating good internal consistency
of all the constructs. In addition, the AVE of the constructs achieved the cut-off value of 0.5,
and all the factor loadings for the tested items were found to be significant at p o0.001.
Discriminant validity was tested using Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) approach. According
to Sekaran and Bougie (2011, p. 160), discriminant validity is when “two variables are
predicted to be uncorrelated, and the scores obtained by measuring them are empirically
IJBM
Factor Composite
36,7 Measures loading Cronbach’s α reliability (CR) AVE

Behavioral intention 0.822 0.823 0.609

I intend to continue using mobile banking
in the future 0.765
I will always try to use mobile banking in my
1398 daily life 0.852
I plan to continue to use mobile banking
frequently 0.788
Performance expectancy 0.868 0.876 0.702
Using mobile banking would improve my
performance 0.755
Using mobile banking would save my time 0.771
I would use mobile banking anyplace 0.835
I would find mobile banking useful 0.729
Effort expectancy 0.838 0.839 0.566
Learning to use mobile banking is easy for me 0.815
Becoming skillful at using mobile banking is
easy for me 0.858
Interaction with mobile banking is easy for me 0.744
I would find mobile banking is easy to use 0.796
Social influence 0.820 0.824 0.61
People who are important to me think that I
should use mobile banking 0.901
People who are familiar with me think that I
should use mobile banking 0.888
People who influence my behavior think that I
should use mobile banking 0.908
Most people surrounding with me use
mobile banking 0.751
Facilitating condition 0.863 0.864 0.615
My living environment supports me to use mobile
banking 0.806
My working environment supports me to use
mobile banking 0.723
Using mobile banking is compatible with my life 0.811
Help is available when I get problem in using
mobile banking 0.833
Hedonic motivation 0.887 0.888 0.799
Using mobile banking is fun 0.915
Using mobile banking is enjoyable 0.899
Using mobile Banking is very entertaining 0.854
Habit 0.892 0.892 0.734
The use of mobile banking has become a habit for
me 0.785
I am addicted to using mobile banking 0.794
I must use mobile banking 0.807
Perceived value 0.83 0.831 0.621
Compared to the fee I need to pay, the use of
mobile banking offers value for money 0.759
Compared to the effort I need to put in, the use of
mobile banking is beneficial to me 0.904
Compared to the time I need to spend, the use of
mobile banking is worthwhile to me 0.831
Table II.
Convergent
validity results (continued )
 Mobile-banking
Factor Composite
Measures loading Cronbach’s α reliability (CR) AVE adoption
Overall, the use of mobile banking delivers me
good value 0.789
Trust 0.785 0.786 0.648
I believe that mobile banking is trustworthy 0.732
I believe that mobile banking keeps its promises 0.789 1399
I believe that mobile banking keeps users’
interests in mind 0.841
Perceived risk 0.813 0.817 0.599
Mobile banking involve more risk when compared
with traditional banking 0.796
Mobile banking would involve more financial risk
when compared with traditional banking 0.784
Where you rate your overall perception of risk
from mobile banking 0.881
Use behavior 71.691 67.582
Your actual frequency of use of mobile banking
services? 0.769 Table II.

found to be so.” All constructs had a significantly higher square root of AVE values compared
to their correlations with other constructs (i.e. see Table III). As a whole, the measurement
model test results fulfill the required validity and reliability criteria. Therefore, the researchers
concluded that the present study’s constructs and measurement model items are appropriate
for measuring the developed propositions and structural models.

Structural model and hypothesis testing

SEM offered the essential measurement concerning how the UTAUT constructs calculate
the m-BI and how this intention leads to m-banking customers’ actual use behavior. SEM is
a statistical modeling method of analysis that enables the testing of a series of separate,
yet interrelated, constructs and regression equations, allowing for the analysis of multiple
relationships at once (Ahmed et al., 2013). The SEM permitted the researchers to conduct
the synchronized analysis of all relationships and causal effects under study (Shainesh,
2012). The analysis derived from the structural model indicated that CMIN/df ¼ 2.191,

B_I P_E E_E S_I F_C H_M H_T P_V T_R P_R U_B

B_I 0.78
P_E 0.711 0.838
E_E 0.591 0.315 0.752
S_I 0.617 0.47 0.365 0.781
F_C 0.283 0.107 0.244 0.209 0.784
H_M 0.287 0.126 0.174 0.152 0.196 0.894
H_T 0.579 0.295 0.278 0.262 0.287 0.228 0.857
P_V 0.756 0.463 0.423 0.402 0.345 0.257 0.338 0.788
T_R 0.503 0.383 0.41 0.341 0.157 0.156 0.297 0.4 0.805
P_R −0.362 −0.16 −0.29 −0.207 −0.194 −0.229 −0.306 −0.278 −0.243 0.774
U_B 0.012 0.017 0.008 0.007 0.011 0.007 0.021 0.011 0.01 −0.006 8.221
Notes: B_I, mobile banking adoption intention; U_B, use behavior; P_E, performance expectancy; E_E, effort Table III.
expectancy; S_I, social influence; F_C, facilitating condition; H_M, hedonic motivation; H_T, habit; T_R, trust; Discriminant
P_V, perceived value; P_R, perceived risk. The values show in diagonal are square root of AVE validity results
IJBM GFI ¼ 0.819, AGFI ¼ 0.849, CFI ¼ 0.903, RMSEA ¼ 0.057 and RMR ¼ 0.05 (see Table IV ),
36,7 all implying significance. The examination of the hypotheses was based on the t-value, with
a value greater than 1.96 (Hair et al., 1998) representing a significant path.
A positive and significant relationship was evident between performance expectancy
and m-BI ( β ¼ 0.299, t ¼ 7.798, p o0.001), while a positive link was also seen between effort
expectancy and BI ( β ¼ 0.205, t ¼ 4.874, p o0.001). Social image showed a positive and
1400 significant effect on BI as well ( β ¼ 0.178, t ¼ 4.727, p o0.001), thereby supporting H1, H2
and H3, respectively.
However, an insignificant effect was observed between facilitating condition and
BI ( β ¼ −0.18, t ¼ −0.554, p ¼ 0.579), thereby rejecting H4. In addition, habit showed a
significant negative influence on BI ( β ¼ −0.165, t ¼ 6.99, p o0.001), consequently
confirming H5. Results also revealed a positive significant effect of hedonic motivation
( β ¼ 0.135, t ¼ 1.984, p o0.001) and perceived value ( β ¼ 0.321, t ¼ 7.857, p o 0.001) on
BI, confirming H6 and H7, respectively.
The outcomes also imply the presence of an insignificant impact of trust on
BI ( β ¼ 0.052, t ¼ 1.230, p ¼ 0.219), which in turn allows for the rejection of H8. Similarly,
perceived risk displayed an insignificant effect on BI ( β ¼ −0.045, t ¼ −1.381, p ¼ 0.167),
thereby rejecting H9.
Finally, mobile BIs showed a significant positive influence on usage behavior
( β ¼ 0.398, t ¼ 3.464, p o0.001) confirming H10. The results of the SEM are summarized in
Table IV (Figures 2 and 3).

5. Discussion
Building on the UTAUT, this study investigated some important factors in m-banking
adoption. It examined the constructs of the UTAUT to better predict consumer mobile BI and
its endorsing role toward the actual usage behavior of m-banking. Our study demonstrated
that UTAUT is an influential framework (Goodhue, 2007) that can significantly improve the
understanding of a significant phenomenon such as m-banking adoption.
According to our results, individuals believe that m-banking performance evokes an
intention to use m-banking in real life. This study confirmed that performance expectancy is
a positive, significant predictor of adoption intention whereby a consumer is more likely to
use m-banking services if his/her performance expectancy is high. The latter is due to the
fact that performance expectations generate positive perceptions of the applications for
prospective customers (Tan and Lau, 2016). Indeed, the greater an individual’s performance
expectancy, the greater his/her belief that m-banking positively contributes to his/her life

Relationships Estimate SE CR p-value Hypothesis

P_E → B_I 0.299 0.038 7.798 *** H1 (supported)

E_E → B_I 0.205 0.042 4.874 *** H2 (supported)
S_I → B_I 0.178 0.038 4.727 *** H3 (supported)
F_C → B_I −0.018 0.032 −0.554 0.579 H4 (Rejected)
H_T → B_I −0.165 0.024 6.993 *** H5 (supported)
H_M → B_I 0.135 0.031 1.984 *** H6 (supported)
P_V → B_I 0.321 0.041 7.857 *** H7 (supported)
T_R → B_I 0.052 0.042 1.230 0.219 H8 (rejected)
P_R → B_I −0.045 0.033 −1.381 0.167 H9 (rejected)
B_I → U_B 0.398 0.115 3.464 *** H10 (supported)
Table IV. Notes: B_I, mobile banking adoption intention; U_B, use behavior; P_E, performance expectancy; E_E, effort
Structural expectancy; S_I, social influence; F_C, facilitating condition; H_M, hedonic motivation; H_T, habit; T_R, trust;
model analysis P_V, perceived value; P_R, perceived risk; CR, critical ratio. β: estimates; t: CR. ***p o0.001
 Mobile-banking
adoption

1401

Figure 2.
Path analysis model
Note: *p< 0.01

and activities compared to other banking alternatives (Alalwan et al., 2016). In fact, the
ubiquitous nature of m-banking applications offers consumers an added advantage when
compared to other banking channels since they provide immediate, personalized assistance
(Mortimer et al., 2015); as a result, customers are more likely to expect high performance
from such application. Consequently, a consumer will adopt m-banking since he/she
believes it to be a convenient and useful tool in the completion of banking transactions
(Yang, 2010).
Our results also highlight the fact that effort expectancy is a positive predictor of m-BI.
According to Park et al. (2007), consumers are always looking for technologies that simplify
their activities while requiring little effort on their behalf. When a consumer senses that a new
technology is easy to use, his/her chances of accepting its application increase significantly
(Lin and Lin, 2014). Indeed, people around the world use their mobile devices extensively on a
daily basis and are becoming largely dependent on these devices for many of their daily
IJBM Performance
Expectancy
36,7 0.299*

Effort Expectancy
0.205*

Social Influence 0.178*

1402 Facilitating Condition –0.018

0.398*
Habit –0.165* Mobile banking Use Behavior
adoption Intention

0.135*
Hedonic Motivation

0.321*
Perceived Value
0.052
Figure 3.
Trust
Structural equation
model path –0.045
coefficients Perceived Risk

activities (Tai and Ku, 2013). Consequently, consumers today are becoming highly proficient
in mobile application usage (Mortimer et al., 2015). As a result, effort expectancy is considered
a significant advantage for m-banking applications when compared to other forms of banking
since consumers perceive that such applications require less effort, emphasize user
friendliness and enable inclusive navigation facilities (Chiwara et al., 2017).
This research further signified that social factors and subjective norms are very
important in enhancing customers’ intentions regarding the adoption of m-banking.
Research has revealed that an individual is more likely to accept and adopt new
technologies in his/her life when these technologies are recommended and endorsed by
important others (Mbrokoh, 2016). In addition, an individual is likely to utilize a new
product/service that is suggested and used by the opinion leader of his/her inner social circle
(Fu and Elliott, 2013). Interestingly, it can be argued that the rapid growth of social media
platforms and online communities has further empowered consumers whereby individuals
are likely to consult online reviews and testimonials prior to adopting a certain application
(Yang and Forney, 2013). Overall, this study confirms that as social beings, consumer
intentions toward m-banking adoption are highly dependent on the norms and values
approved and accepted by their surrounding society (Bhatti, 2007). Furthermore, the
Pakistani culture may be the cause of the high impact of social norms because this
collectivist nation prioritizes and values the opinions of an individual’s family and group
instead of his/her own preferences and beliefs (Kumar et al., 2017).
Yet even though facilitating conditions were proposed as positive significant predictors of
intention, the current results reveal that facilitating conditions pose an insignificant impact on
mobile BI. Such a finding can be rationalized using the following argument: when
performance expectancy and effort expectancy are present, facilitating conditions’ impact on
adoption intention becomes insignificant (Venkatesh et al., 2003). Indeed, facilitating
conditions may pose no significant effect on mobile BI in certain cultures and environments as
the existing infrastructure does not support such services (Mbrokoh, 2016). In addition, some
mobile carriers tend to charge extra fees when applications such as m-banking platforms are
used; thus, these additional costs may be perceived as a burden that can act as an adoption
barrier (Zhou, 2012). The Pakistani culture is ranked high on the uncertainty avoidance scale
(Ahmed and Ghouri, 2016), which could also hinder m-banking adoption despite the presence
of the necessary infrastructure and facilitating conditions. Nevertheless, further research is Mobile-banking
required to assess whether facilitating conditions have variable degrees of impact on mobile adoption
BIs across different cultures in order to confirm this rationale.
The results further indicate that habit has a negative significant impact on an individual’s
mobile BI, suggesting that a consumer is likely to hesitate when it comes to the adoption of
new technology since it falls against already ingrained habits. Moorthy et al. (2017) found that
habit is one of the main blockades to consumer acceptance of new technology. Indeed, existing 1403
habits are automatic, non-cognitive choices that are hard to shake off as they simplify the
decision-making process and create resistance toward any behaviors that require further
rational effort (Hong et al., 2008). Tradition could be one of the main barriers to mobile BI since
consumers are reluctant when it comes to changing their banking habits and forgoing
traditional banking mediums (Chemingui and Hajer, 2013); the greater the level of change
required by a new medium, the greater the resistance expected from a prospective consumer
(Laukkanen et al., 2007).
Interestingly, this study’s results imply that hedonic motivation is the strongest predictor
of adoption intention with regard to m-banking services. According to Alalwan et al. (2015),
new technologies such as m-banking applications are one of the main sources of consumers’
self-motivation. Individuals can show a great interest in novel and innovative ideas and
technologies, which appeal to their intrinsic hedonic motivation (Arenas-Gaitán et al., 2015). As
a result, consumers tend to accept and embrace such technologies since they are perceived to
be sources of hedonic motives and pleasure (Malaquias and Hwang, 2016). Moreover,
consumers tend to associate their mobile devices with enjoyment and escapism; such emotions
are further amplified by the applications’ visually appealing layouts and colors (Malaquias
and Hwang, 2017). Consumers have also reported feelings of fun and playfulness from the use
of m-banking services derived from the navigation of these applications on their devices,
thereby generating additional value for the user (Malik et al., 2013). Coming consumers
consider the traditional banking medium somewhat stressful as it can be a time-consuming
process (Omar et al., 2011); conversely, mobile devices tend to be associated with fun, which
can alleviate the stress of traditional banking and create a more pleasurable experience overall.
On a similar note, the study confirms that perceived value is a positive and significant
determinant of individual intention toward m-banking. Indeed, customers prefer to use
products/services that they believe will offer them the greatest performance, value and
overall advantages (Dootson et al., 2016). An individual’s subjective judgment of the value
presented by m-banking applications will enhance his/her attitudes regarding the given
channel and, thus, increase his/her willingness to use these platforms (Shih, 2015).
Accordingly, consumers are likely to adopt m-banking if they presume that these services
offer the best performance-to-price value and provide the most advantages when compared
to other banking services (Moorthy et al., 2017). This falls in line with our findings since
m-banking offers a ubiquitous banking option available at all times and all locations,
making it likely to offer the greatest perceived value to prospective users. M-banking
applications offer both a functional value due to their technical benefits and an emotional
value derived from the fun experiences they generate, in turn creating both monetary and
non-monetary value (Berraies et al., 2017).
On the other hand, this study proposed the addition of trust and perceived risk as
additional constructs to the existing UTAUT theory. However, and contrary to the posited
hypothesis, the results indicate that neither trust nor perceived risk have a significant
impact with regard to a consumer’s adoption intentions. A series of recent studies similarly
found trust and perceived risk to have no significant intention on consumer online and
mobile BI (Koksal, 2016; Ahmed and Ali, 2017). Interestingly, researchers have recently
implied that, in online and m-banking services, trust and perceived risks fail to assess
individual intentions whereas a new construct, perceived credibility, impacts the adoption of
IJBM the latter technologies (Yu, 2012). Perceived credibility is a distinct construct that
36,7 incorporates an individual’s perception of an application’s security, trust and privacy
features and capabilities (Amin et al., 2008; Luarn and Lin, 2005). In fact, perceived
credibility has replaced trust and perceived risk in a number of recent mobile and online
banking studies since it offers a more accurate understanding of consumer intentions in the
given context (Amin, 2009; Yuen et al., 2010). Therefore, future research can benefit from
1404 the inclusion of this construct to validate the latter supposition.
Finally, the results of the current study imply that a consumer’s adoption intention
significantly impacts actual usage behavior ( Jogiyanto, 2007). This falls in line with extant
literature, which indicates that adoption intentions are one of the primary underlying
motivators of actual usage behavior (Celuch et al., 2014). Behavioral intentions indicate the
degree to which an individual applies a deliberate, cognitive effort in aim of completing a
certain task (Thakur and Srivastava, 2013); accordingly, behavioral intentions have been
deemed one of the closest cognitive precedents of behavior since desire breeds actual
conduct (Suliantoro et al., 2015). The latter has caused many contemporary studies to utilize
intention as a proxy to gauge actual behavior (Yu, 2012; Omotayo and Adebayo, 2015).

6. Conclusion
This study has demonstrated that the UTAUT constructs offer an accurate prediction
regarding banking customers’ intention to adopt m-banking. Customers consider
performance and effort expectancy to be important factors that influence their m-banking
adoption likelihood. The results of our study also indicate that m-banking adoption is
significantly impacted by perceived value, hedonic motivation, habit and social influence.
The results further imply that facilitating conditions, trust and perceived risk all appear to
be insignificant predictors of consumer adoption intentions. Finally, the current study
implies that intention successfully lead toward the actual usage of m-banking. Accordingly,
the current manuscript offers a number of theoretical and practical implications.
First, this study expands upon the understanding of consumer mobile BIs in the context
of a developing nation, thereby addressing a major knowledge gap in the related literature;
it further offers an extension to the traditional UTAUT model to offer a more accurate and
well-rounded comprehension of individual technology adoption intentions and usage
behavior. It also indicates the importance of utilizing perceived value as a construct instead
of the original price sensitivity variable since it offers a more precise examination of
technology adoption intention; the updated construct takes into account both monetary and
non-monetary values. The use of the additional factors (i.e. perceived value, trust and
perceived risk) can offer novel insights to future studies that aim to assess new technology
adoption. This study also contributes to the existing knowledge of the impact of the
UTAUT factors on consumer mobile BIs, providing an enhanced understanding of how
these factors impact intentions within a developing nation that is largely composed of rural,
underdeveloped areas. Last, but not the least, this paper emphasizes the importance of
measuring consumer adoption intentions as they act as significant indications of consumers’
actual behavior.
This study serves as a practical guide for banks and their marketing managers by
offering valuable insights into the consumer thought process and their subsequent adoption
likelihood. Marketers can utilize marketing messages that increase awareness and highlight
the performance and value of their respective m-banking services and applications; this
should be done while also emphasizing their simplicity and ubiquity, thereby appealing to
prospective users’ performance and effort expectancy motives. It is also highly important
for marketing managers to emphasize the immediate advantages and overall usefulness of
m-banking services in order to enhance the perceived value of these applications and
alleviate any individual concerns in order to persuade consumers to use such applications.
This will also motivate potential consumers to forgo their traditional banking habits and Mobile-banking
consider m-banking facilities. Furthermore, banks should keep in mind that one of the main adoption
barriers to m-banking adoption includes the perceived costs; they must develop applications
that are free of charge and can be used offline to reduce the costs associated with carrier
charges as well.
In addition, the study indicated that social influence is a largely critical factor in
determining a Pakistani consumer’s likelihood to adopt m-banking applications. Therefore, 1405
marketers and bank managers should apply incentives and promotions to consumers who
provide referrals to their friends and family members. Similarly, bank managers must
remember that individuals are unlikely to break their habits and adopt m-banking
technologies; consequently, marketers must employ incentives such as special offers,
product discounts and/or rewards to attract potential customers and encourage them to
break their ingrained habits. These promotions will in turn augment the perceived value of
these applications to prospective users, increasing their likelihood to adopt and embrace
m-banking. Managers and marketers should also keep in mind the importance of hedonic
motivations when designing and promoting these services; these applications should be
designed in a manner that is visually appealing and includes multi-sensory, entertainment
elements to attract prospective customers. In fact, marketing messages promoting
m-banking services should not focus exclusively on the functional benefits of these
applications, but also prominently highlight their hedonic features.

Limitations and future studies

This study, as all studies, has a number of limitations. The current manuscript employed a
cross-sectional, convenience sample due to time and budget constraints and was limited to
five banks. Moreover, the study considered Pakistan only, which restrained the
generalizability of the existing findings across different cultures. Thus, future research
should employ a cross-cultural approach in order to assess the impact of cultural
dimensions on individual m-banking usage intentions. Meanwhile, this study was
conducted exclusively at the pre-adoption stage; similar studies should be administered at
different stages of the consumer journey (e.g. maturity stage) to assess consumer m-banking
usage intentions at different points in time. This will enable researchers to examine whether
the considered factors, including facilitating conditions, trust and perceived risk, display
different relationships with behavioral intentions and usage behavior across the different
stages of the consumer–service relationship. A longitudinal study can also offer interesting
insights that span the distinct stages of the m-banking consumer’s journey.

References
Adesuyi, F.A., Solomon, A.A., Robert, Y.D. and Alabi, O.I. (2013), “A survey of ATM security
implementation within the Nigerian banking environment”, Journal of Internet Banking and
Commerce, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 1-16.
Afshan, S. and Sharif, A. (2016), “Acceptance of mobile banking framework in Pakistan”, Telematics
and Informatics, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 370-387.
Ahmed, I. and Ali, A. (2017), “Determinants of continuance intention to use mobile money transfer: an
integrated model”, Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, Vol. 22 No. S7, pp. 1-24.
Ahmed, S. and Ghouri, A.M. (2016), “Impact of online consumer experience and uncertainty avoidance
towards consumer perception in virtual shopping: an empirical study in Karachi Pakistan”,
Indian Journal of Commerce and Management Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 74-80.
Ahmed, Z., Anang, R., Othman, N. and Sambasivan, M. (2013), “To purchase or not to purchase US
products: role of religiosity, animosity, and ethnocentrism among Malaysian consumers”,
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 7, pp. 551-563.
IJBM Alalwan, A.A., Dwivedi, Y.K., Rana, N.P. and Simintiras, A.C. (2016), “Jordanian consumers’ adoption of
36,7 telebanking”, The International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 690-709.
Alalwan, A.A., Dwivedi, Y.K., Rana, N.P., Lal, B. and Williams, M.D. (2015), “Consumer adoption of
internet banking in Jordan: examining the role of hedonic motivation, habit, self-efficacy and
trust”, Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 145-157.
Al-Jabri, I. and Sohail, M.S. (2012), “Mobile banking adoption: application of diffusion of innovation
1406 theory”, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 379-391.
Amin, H. (2009), “An analysis of online banking usage intentions: an extension of the technology
acceptance model”, International Journal of Business and Society, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 27-40.
Amin, H., Hamid, M., Lada, S. and Anis, Z. (2008), “The adoption of mobile banking in Malaysia: the
case of bank Islam Malaysia Berhad”, International Journal of Business and Society, Vol. 9 No. 2,
pp. 43-53.
Amoroso, D.L. and Magnier-Watanabe, R. (2012), “Building a research model for mobile wallet
consumer adoption: the case of mobile Suica in Japan”, Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 94-110.
Antón, C., Camarero, C. and Rodríguez, J. (2013), “Usefulness, enjoyment, and self-image congruence:
the adoption of e-book readers”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 372-384.
Arahita, C.L. and Hatammimi, J. (2015), “Factors affecting the intention to reuse mobile banking
service”, International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 15-22.
Arcand, M., PromTep, S., Brun, I. and Rajaobelina, L. (2017), “Mobile banking service quality
and customer relationships”, The International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 7,
pp. 1066-1087.
Arenas-Gaitán, J., Peral-Peral, B. and Ramón-Jerónimo, A. (2015), “Elderly and internet banking: an
application of UTAUT2”, Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 1-23.
Awasthi, P. and Sangle, P. (2013), “The importance of value and context for mobile CRM services in
banking”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 864-891.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94.
Baker, E.W., Al-Gahtani, S.S. and Hubona, G.S. (2007), “The effects of gender and age on new
technology implementation in a developing country: testing the theory of planned behavior”,
Information, Technology, People, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 352-375.
Baptista, G. and Oliveira, T. (2015), “Understanding mobile banking: the unified theory of acceptance
and use of technology combined with cultural moderators”, Computers in Human Behavior,
Vol. 50, September, pp. 418-430.
Baptista, G. and Oliveira, T. (2016), “A weight and a meta-analysis on mobile banking acceptance
research”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 63, October, pp. 480-489.
Barnett, T., Kellermanns, F.W., Pearson, A.W. and Pearson, R.A. (2007), “Measuring information
system usage: replication and extensions”, The Journal of Computer Information Systems,
Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 76-85.
Berraies, S., BenYahia, K. and Hannachi, M. (2017), “Identifying the effects of perceived values of
mobile banking applications on customers: comparative study between baby
boomers, generation X and generation Y”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35
No. 6, pp. 1018-1038.
Bharti, M. (2016), “Impact of dimensions of mobile banking on user satisfaction”, Journal of Internet
Banking and Commerce, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Bhatti, T. (2007), “Exploring factors influencing the adoption of mobile commerce”, Journal of Internet
Banking and Commerce, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 1-13.
Brown, S.A. and Venkatesh, V. (2005), “A model of adoption of technology in the household: a baseline
model test and extension incorporating household life cycle”, Management Information Systems
Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 399-426.
Carlson, C. and Chan, A. (2011), “Attitude toward wealth management services”, The International Mobile-banking
Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 272-292. adoption
Celik, H. (2016), “Customer online shopping anxiety within the unified theory of acceptance and
use technology framework”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 28 No. 2,
pp. 278-307.
Celuch, K., Bourdeau, B., Saxby, C. and Ehlen, C. (2014), “SME internet use: the moderating role of
normative influence”, Journal of Small Business Strategy, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 69-90.
1407
Chan, F., Thong, J., Venkatesh, V., Brown, S., Hu, P. and Tam, K. (2010), “Modeling citizen satisfaction
with mandatory adoption of an e-government technology”, Journal of the Association for
Information Systems, Vol. 11 No. 10, pp. 519-549.
Chandio, F.H., Irani, Z., Abbasi, M.S. and Nizamani, H.A. (2013), “Acceptance of online banking
information systems: an empirical case in a developing economy”, Behaviour and Information
Technology, Vol. 32 No. 7, pp. 668-680.
Chawla, D. and Joshi, H. (2017), “Consumer perspectives about mobile banking adoption in India:
a cluster analysis”, The International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 616-636.
Chemingui, H. and Hajer, B.L. (2013), “Resistance, motivations, trust and intention to use mobile
financial services”, The International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 574-592.
Chen, W. (2013), “Perceived value in community supported agriculture (CSA)”, British Food Journal,
Vol. 115 No. 10, pp. 1428-1453.
Chiao-Chen, C. (2013), “Library mobile applications in university libraries”, Library Hi Tech, Vol. 31
No. 3, pp. 478-492.
Chin, W., Peterson, R. and Brown, S. (2008), “Structural equation modeling in marketing: some practical
reminders”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 287-298.
Chiwara, J.R., Chinyamurindi, W.T. and Mjoli, T.Q. (2017), “Factors that influence the use of the internet
for job-seeking purposes amongst a sample of final-year students in the Eastern Cape province
of South Africa”, SA Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-9.
Curran, J.M. and Meuter, M.L. (2007), “Encouraging existing customers to switch to self-service
technologies: put a little fun in their lives”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 15
No. 4, pp. 283-298.
Dajani, D. and Yaseen, S.G. (2016), “The applicability of technology acceptance models in the Arab
business setting”, Journal of Business and Retail Management Research, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 46-56.
Davis, F., Bagozzi, R. and Warshaw, P. (1989), “User acceptance of computer technology: comparison of
two theoretical models”, Management Science, Vol. 35 No. 8, pp. 982-1002.
Dootson, P., Beatson, A. and Drennan, J. (2016), “Financial institutions using social media – do
consumers perceive value?”, The International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 9-36.
Fakhoury, R. and Baker, D.S. (2016), “Governmental trust, active citizenship, and e-government
acceptance in Lebanon”, Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 36-52.
Farah, M.F. (2017a), “Application of the theory of planned behavior to customer switching intentions in
the context of bank consolidations”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 1,
pp. 147-172.
Farah, M.F. (2017b), “Consumers’ switching motivations and intention in the case of bank mergers:
a cross-cultural study”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 254-274.
Farah, M.F. and Ramadan, Z.B. (2017), “Disruptions versus more disruptions: how the Amazon dash
button is altering consumer buying patterns”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
Vol. 39, November, pp. 54-61.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Fu, F.Q. and Elliott, M.T. (2013), “The moderating effect of perceived product innovativeness and
product knowledge on new product adoption: an integrated model”, Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 257-272.
IJBM Gao, L. and Bai, X. (2014), “An empirical study on continuance intention of mobile social networking
36,7 services”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 168-189.
Glavee-Geo, R., Shaikh, A. and Karjaluoto, H. (2017), “Mobile banking services adoption in Pakistan:
are there gender differences?”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 7,
pp. 1088-1112.
Goodhue, D.L. (2007), “Comment on Benbasat and Barki’s ‘Quo Vadis TAM’ article”, Journal of the AIS,
1408 Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 219-222.
Goswami, S. (2017), “Are customers ready to use mobile technology for banking transactions? An
investigation”, Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, Vol. 22 No. 8, pp. 1-13.
Groupe Speciale Mobile Association (2017a), “The mobile economy 2017”, available at: www.
gsmaintelligence.com/research/?file=9e927fd6896724e7b26f33f61db5b9d5&download (accessed
August 27, 2017).
Groupe Speciale Mobile Association (2017b), “GSMA intelligence”, available at: www.gsmaintelligence.
com/markets/2733/dashboard/ (accessed September 21, 2017).
Gu, J.C., Lee, S.C. and Suh, Y.H. (2009), “Determinants of behavioral intention to mobile banking”,
Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36 No. 9, pp. 11605-11616.
Ha, K., Canedoli, A., Baur, A.W. and Bick, M. (2012), “Mobile banking insights on its increasing
relevance and most common drivers of adoption”, Electronic Markets, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 217-227.
Hair, J.F., Andreson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed.,
Prentice-Hall Inc., New York, NY.
Hanafizadeh, P., Behboudi, M., Koshksaray, A. and Tabar, M. (2013), “Mobile banking adoption by
Iranian bank clients”, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 62-78.
Hausman, A. and Siepke, J. (2009), “The effect of web interface features on consumer online purchase
intentions”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 5-13.
Hew, J.J., Lee, V.H., Ooi, K.B. and Wei, J. (2015), “What catalyzes mobile apps usage intention: an
empirical analysis?”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 115 No. 7, pp. 1269-1291.
Hong, S., Kim, J. and Lee, H. (2008), “Antecedents of use-continuance in information systems: toward an
integrative view”, The Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 61-73.
Illia, A., Ngniatedema, T. and Huang, Z. (2015), “A conceptual model for mobile banking adoption”,
Journal of Management Information and Decision Sciences, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 111-122.
Jacoby, J. and Kaplan, L.B. (1972), “The components of perceived risk”, Advances in Consumer Research
Proceedings of the Association of Consumer Research, pp. 382-393.
Jarvenpaa, S.L., Tractinsky, N. and Vitale, M. (2000), “Consumer trust in an internet store”, Information
Technology and Management, Vol. 1 Nos 1-2, pp. 45-71.
Jogiyanto, H.M. (2007), Sistem Informasi Keprilakuan, AndiPublisher, Yogyakarta.
Kalaiarasi, H. and Srividya, V. (2012), “A study on wireless banking services – the case of mobile
banking with integrated technology acceptance model”, Journal of Contemporary Research in
Management, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 31-40.
Kazi, A.K. and Mannan, M.A. (2013), “Factors affecting adoption of mobile banking in Pakistan:
empirical evidence”, International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, Vol. 2 No. 3,
pp. 54-61.
Khan, M.Z.A. and Khan, S. (2012), “Internet versus mobile banking: a study of Peshawar city”, Journal
of Internet Banking and Commerce, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 1-13.
Kim, D.J., Ferrin, D.L. and Rao, H.R. (2008), “A trust-based consumer decision-making model in
electronic commerce: the role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents”, Decision Support
Systems, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 544-564.
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. 111-126.
Kim, S.S., Malhotra, N.K. and Narasimhan, S. (2005), “Research note – two competing perspectives on Mobile-banking
automatic use: a theoretical and empirical comparison”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 16 adoption
No. 4, pp. 418-432.
Kline, R.B. (1998), “Software review: software programs for structural equation modeling: AMOS, EQS,
and LISREL”, Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 343-364.
Koksal, M.H. (2016), “The intentions of Lebanese consumers to adopt mobile banking”, The
International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 327-346. 1409
Kumar, A., Channa, K.A. and Bhutto, N.A. (2017), “Gender as moderator of the relationship between
supervisory support and work to family enrichment”, Global Management Journal for Academic
& Corporate Studies, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 103-109.
Kumar, R.G., Rejikumar, G. and Ravindran, D.S. (2012), “An empirical study on service quality
perceptions and continuance intention in mobile banking context in India”, Journal of Internet
Banking and Commerce, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Laukkanen, T. (2007), “Internet vs. mobile banking: comparing customer value perceptions”, Business
Process Management Journal, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 788-797.
Laukkanen, T. and Lauronen, J. (2005), “Consumer value creation in mobile banking services”,
International Journal of Mobile Communications, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 325-338.
Laukkanen, T. and Pasanen, M. (2008), “Mobile banking innovators and early adopters: how they differ
from other online users?”, Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 86-94.
Laukkanen, T., Sinkkonen, S., Kivijärvi, M. and Laukkanen, P. (2007), “Innovation resistance among
mature consumers”, The Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 7, pp. 419-427.
Li, M., Dong, Z.Y. and Chen, X. (2012), “Factors influencing consumption experience of mobile
commerce”, Internet Research, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 120-141.
Limayem, M. and Hirt, S.G. (2003), “Force of habit and information systems usage: theory and initial
validation”, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 65-97.
Limayem, M., Hirt, S. and Cheung, C. (2007), “How habit limits the predictive power of intention: the
case of information systems continuance”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 705-737.
Lin, H.F. (2011), “An empirical investigation of mobile banking adoption: the effect of innovation
attributes and knowledge-based trust”, International Journal of Information Management,
Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 252-260.
Lin, T. and Lin, I. (2014), “Factors for information technology acceptance willingness and adoption in
logistics industry from supply chain perspectives”, International Journal of Electronic Business
Management, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 167-177.
Lua, J., Liub, C. and Weic, J. (2016), “How important are enjoyment and mobility for mobile
applications?”, The Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 1-12.
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. 873-891.
Luo, X., Li, H., Zhang, J. and Shim, J.P. (2010), “Examining multi-dimensional trust and multi-faceted
risk in initial acceptance of emerging technologies: an empirical study of mobile banking
services”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 222-234.
Maduku, D.K. (2015), “An empirical investigation of students’ behavioural intention to use e-books”,
Management Dynamics, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 2-20.
Malaquias, R.F. and Hwang, Y. (2016), “An empirical study on trust in mobile banking: a developing
country perspective”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 54, January, pp. 453-461.
Malaquias, R.F. and Hwang, Y. (2017), “Mixing business and pleasure: empirical implications for trust
in mobile banking”, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 212-224.
Malik, A., Kumra, R. and Srivastava, V. (2013), “Determinants of consumer acceptance of m-commerce”,
South Asian Journal of Management, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 102-126.
IJBM Martins, C., Oliveira, T. and Popovic, A. (2014), “Understanding the internet banking adoption:
36,7 a unified theory of acceptance and use of technology and perceived risk application”,
International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 1-13.
Mbrokoh, A.S. (2016), “Exploring the factors that influence the adoption of internet banking in Ghana”,
Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 1-20.
Mha, K. (2015), “A mobile banking adoption model in the Jordanian market: an integration of TAM
1410 with perceived risks and perceived benefits”, Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, Vol. 20
No. 3, pp. 1-35.
Mishra, V. and Bisht, S.S. (2013), “Mobile banking in a developing economy: a customer-centric model
for policy formulation”, Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 503-514.
Moorthy, K., Ling, C.S., Fatt, Y.W., Yee, C.M., Yin, E.C.K., Yee, K.S. and Wei, L.K. (2017), “Barriers of
mobile commerce adoption intention: perceptions of generation X in Malaysia”, Journal of
Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 37-53.
Morgan, R. and Hunt, D. (1994), “The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 20-38.
Mortimer, G., Neale, L., Hasan, S.F.E. and Dunphy, B. (2015), “Investigating the factors influencing the
adoption of m-banking: a cross cultural study”, The International Journal of Bank Marketing,
Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 545-570.
Moser, F. (2015), “Mobile banking: a fashionable concept or an institutionalized channel in future retail
banking? Analyzing patterns in the practical and academic mobile banking literature”,
International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 162-177.
Mullan, J., Bradley, L. and Loane, S. (2017), “Bank adoption of mobile banking: stakeholder
perspective”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 1152-1172.
Mustafa, K. and Waheed, A. (2016), “Impact of alternative factors on usage of telco-led branchless
banking services: empirical evidence from Pakistan”, Journal of Internet Banking and
Commerce, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 1-19.
Nel, J., Boshoff, C. and Raleting, T. (2012), “Exploiting the technology cluster effect to enhance the adoption
of WIG mobile banking among low-income earners”, Management Dynamics, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 30-44.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Nwagwu, W. and Akeem, A. (2013), “Contexts of utilization of ICT by medical practitioners in private
hospitals in Osun State Nigeria”, World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable
Development, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 229-246.
Nysveen, H. (2005), “Intentions to use mobile services: antecedents and cross-service comparisons”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 330-346.
Okazaki, S., Blas, S.S. and Castañeda, J.A. (2015), “Physicians’ adoption of mobile health monitoring
systems in spain: competing models and impact of prior experience”, Journal of Electronic
Commerce Research, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 194-217.
Oliveira, T., Faria, M., Thomas, M.A. and Popovič, A. (2014), “Extending the understanding of mobile
banking adoption: when UTAUT meets TTF and ITM”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 689-703.
Omar, A.B., Sultan, N., Zaman, K., Bibi, N., Wajid, A. and Khan, K. (2011), “Customer perception
towards online banking services: empirical evidence from Pakistan”, Journal of Internet Banking
and Commerce, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 1-24.
Omotayo, F.O. and Adebayo, A.K. (2015), “Factors influencing intention to adopt internet banking by
postgraduate students of University of Ibadan, Nigeria”, Journal of Internet Banking and
Commerce, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 1-29.
Park, J., Yang, S. and Lehto, X. (2007), “Adoption of mobile technologies for Chinese consumers”,
Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 196-206.
Patel, V. (2016), “Use of mobile wallet service by the youth: a study based in Ahmedabad”, ASBM
Journal of Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 50-61.
Pavlou, P. and Gefen, D. (2004), “Building effective online marketplaces with institution-based trust”, Mobile-banking
Information Systems Research, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 37-59. adoption
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. 224-235.
Rahmani, Z., Tahvildari, A., Honarmand, H., Yousefi, H. and Daghighi, M.S. (2012), “Mobile banking
and its benefits”, Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review (Oman Chapter), Vol. 2 1411
No. 5, pp. 37-40.
Rawashdeh, A. (2015), “Factors affecting adoption of internet banking in Jordan”, The International
Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 510-529.
Sahoo, D. and Pillai, S. (2017), “Role of mobile banking servicescape on customer attitude and
engagement: an empirical investigation in India”, International Journal of Bank Marketing,
Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 1113-1130.
Sampaio, C., Ladeira, W. and Santini, F. (2017), “Apps for mobile banking and customer satisfaction:
a cross-cultural study”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 1131-1151.
Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R. (2011), Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach,
John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Shaikh, A.A. and Karjaluoto, H. (2015), “Mobile banking adoption: a literature review”, Telematics and
Informatics, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 129-142.
Shainesh, G. (2012), “Effects of trustworthiness and trust on loyalty intentions validating a parsimonious
model in banking”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 267-279.
Shankar, A. and Kumari, P. (2016), “Factors affecting mobile banking adoption behavior in India”,
Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 1-24.
Shih, K. (2015), “A correlation analysis of mobile banking use intentions”, Journal of Accounting,
Finance & Management Strategy, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 1-17.
Shih-Wei, C. (2010), “Why do members contribute knowledge to online communities?”, Online
Information Review, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 829-854.
Siddik, M.N.A., Sun, G., Yanjuan, C. and Kabiraj, S. (2014), “Financial inclusion through mobile banking:
a case of Bangladesh”, Journal of Applied Finance and Banking, Vol. 4 No. 6, pp. 109-136.
Singh, S. (2014), “Customer perception of mobile banking: an empirical study in National Capital
Region Delhi”, Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 1-22.
Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J. and Sabol, B. (2002), “Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational
exchanges”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 15-37.
Sripalawat, J., Thongmak, M. and Ngramyarn, A. (2011), “M-banking in metropolitan Bangkok and a
comparison with other countries”, The Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 51 No. 3,
pp. 67-76.
State Bank of Pakistan (2016), “Regulations for mobile banking interoperability”, available at: www.
sbp.org.pk/bprd/2016/C3-Annx-A.pdf (accessed August 25, 2016).
Straub, D., Boudreau, M. and Gefen, D. (2004), “Validation guidelines for IS positivist research”,
Communications of AIS, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 380-427.
Streeter, B. (2009), “Mobile on the move”, ABA Banking Journal, Vol. 101 No. 5, pp. 26-29.
Suliantoro, H., Ghozali, I. and Wibowo, M. (2015), “E-procurement adoption in government: predicting
social values effect on intention and usage behavior of e-procurement”, International Journal of
Business and Society, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 167-184.
Tai, Y. and Ku, Y. (2013), “Will stock investors use mobile stock trading? A benefit-risk assessment
based on a modified UTAUT model”, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 14 No. 1,
pp. 67-84.
Tam, C. and Oliveira, T. (2016), “Performance impact of mobile banking: using the task-technology fit
(TTF) approach”, The International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 434-457.
IJBM Tam, C. and Oliveira, T. (2017), “Literature review of mobile banking and individual performance”,
36,7 International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 1042-1065.
Tan, E. and Lau, J.L. (2016), “Behavioural intention to adopt mobile banking among the millennial
generation”, Young Consumers, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 18-31.
Tan, G.W., Chong, C., Ooi, K. and Chong, A.Y. (2010), “The adoption of online banking in Malaysia: an
empirical analysis”, International Journal of Business and Management Science, Vol. 3 No. 2,
pp. 169-193.
1412
Tan, M. and Teo, T.S. (2000), “Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking”, Journal of the AIS,
Vol. 5 No. 1, p. 5.
Thakur, R. (2014), “What keeps mobile banking customers loyal?”, International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 7, pp. 628-646.
Thakur, R. and Srivastava, M. (2013), “Customer usage intention of mobile commerce in India:
an empirical study”, Journal of Indian Business Research, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 52-72.
Venkatesh, V. (2000), “Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation,
and emotion into the technology acceptance model”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 11
No. 4, pp. 342-365.
Venkatesh, V. and Bala, H. (2008), “Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on
interventions”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 273-315.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y. and Xu, X. (2012), “Consumer acceptance and use of information technology:
extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 1,
pp. 157-178.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y.L. and Xu, X. (2016), “Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: a
synthesis and the road ahead”, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 17 No. 5,
pp. 328-376.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003), “User acceptance of information
technology: toward a unified view”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 425-478.
Verplanken, B. and Orbell, S. (2003), “Reflections on past behavior: a self-report index of habit
strength”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 1313-1330.
Wessels, L. and Drennan, J. (2010), “An investigation of customer acceptance of m-banking”,
International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 7, pp. 547-568.
Wong, W. and Huang, N.N. (2011), “The effects of e-learning system service quality and users’
acceptance on organizational learning”, International Journal of Business and Information, Vol. 6
No. 2, pp. 205-225.
Wu, J.H. and Wang, S.C. (2005), “What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of the revised
technology acceptance model”, Information and Management, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 719-729.
Xin, H., Techatassanasoontorn, A.A. and Tan, F.B. (2015), “Antecedents of consumer trust in mobile
payment adoption”, The Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 1-10.
Yang, K. (2010), “Determinants of US consumer mobile shopping services adoption: implications for
designing mobile shopping services”, The Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 262-270.
Yang, K. and Forney, J.C. (2013), “The moderating role of consumer technology anxiety in mobile
shopping adoption: differential effects of facilitating conditions and social influences”, Journal of
Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 334-347.
Yeow, P. and Loo, W. (2009), “Acceptability of ATM and transit applications embedded in
multipurpose Smart Identity Card: an exploratory study in Malaysia”, International Journal of
Electronic Government Research, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 37-56.
Yu, C.S. (2012), “Factors affecting individuals to adopt mobile banking: empirical evidence from the
UTAUT model”, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 104-121.
Yuen, Y., Yeow, P., Lim, N. and Saylani, N. (2010), “Internet banking adoption: comparing
developed and developing countries”, The Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 51
No. 1, pp. 52-61.
Yun, H., Han, D. and Lee, C.C. (2013), “Understanding the use of location-based service applications: do Mobile-banking
privacy concerns matter?”, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 215-230. adoption
Zhang, X., Guo, X., Lai, K., Yin, C. and Meng, F. (2017), “From offline healthcare to online health
services: the role of offline healthcare satisfaction and habits”, Journal of Electronic Commerce
Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 138-154.
Zhou, T. (2011), “An empirical examination of initial trust in mobile banking”, Internet Research, Vol. 21
No. 5, pp. 527-540.
1413
Zhou, T. (2012), “Examining location-based services usage from the perspectives of unified theory of
acceptance and use of technology and perceived risk”, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research,
Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 135-144.
Zhou, T., Lu, Y. and Wang, B. (2010), “Integrating TTF and UTAUT to explain mobile banking user
adoption”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 760-767.
Zhu, G., Sangwan, S. and Ting-Jie, L. (2010), “A new theoretical framework of technology acceptance
and empirical investigation on self-efficacy-based value adoption model”, Nankai Business
Review International, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 345-372.

Further reading
Bagozzi, R.P. (2007), “The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm
shift”, Journal of the AIS, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 244-254.

Corresponding author
Maya F. Farah can be contacted at: mfarah@lau.edu.lb

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com