Exploring country differences in the adoption of mobile payment service: the surprising robustness of the UTAUT2 model

Abstract

Purpose

This paper investigated the extent to which the predictive power of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) was robust against cultural variations and to what extent its predictive power could be improved by including face-valid individual differences (i.e. perceived risk and personal innovativeness) and cultural factors (i.e. individualism and uncertainty avoidance).

Design/methodology/approach

Data were collected from web surveys of Chinese, American and Belgian mobile Internet users (total n = 1,068).

Findings

The authors found that the UTAUT2 model was less predictive in the country where the adoption of mobile payment service (MPS) is high (i.e. China). In contrast, the UTAUT2 model was more predictive in countries where the adoption of MPS is lower (i.e. the United States and Belgium). The authors did not find additional variance explained by individual differences. Regarding the cultural variables, the authors found that individualism moderated the effect of social influence on behavioral intention to use MPS, such that the effect was more substantial among people with individualistic cultural traits. However, the authors found no moderation effect of uncertainty avoidance.

Originality/value

This research contributes to existing work on technology acceptance by exploring whether it is helpful to introduce individual and cultural factors into the UTAUT2 model when predicting technology adoption in different cultures. This research further examines the moderating role of cultural factors in predicting the adoption of MPS. The authors conclude that the UTAUT2 model is generally robust and appears to capture the predictive of face-valid individual and cultural factors.

Citation

Wu, Z. and Liu, Y. (2023), "Exploring country differences in the adoption of mobile payment service: the surprising robustness of the UTAUT2 model", International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 237-268. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-02-2022-0052