Mobile banking rollout in emerging markets: evidence from Brazil

By Pedro Cruz, Lineu Barretto Filgueiras Neto, Pablo Muñoz-Gallego, Tommi Laukkanen. 2010

404 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems and Management, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/df2dabf2f4a9b9e47a4a2dd782e9a1186f732e12

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems and Management

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

A cross-cultural study of the intention to use mobile banking between Lebanese and British consumers: Extending UTAUT2 with security, privacy and trust (2019, background): “Customers can now complete their banking at a time and place of their choosing [3,4].”
An investigation of users’ continuance intention towards mobile banking in China (2016, background): “In addition, perceived risk (Cruz et al., 2010; Chen, 2013): initial trust (Zhou, 2011a): trust (Koo and Wati, 2010): flow experience (Zhou, 2012): innovation attributes and knowledge-based trust (Lin, 2011) are also validated to have positive/negative effects.”
Mobile Banking Adoption: An Examination of Technology Acceptance Model and Theory of Planned Behavior (2013, background): “With regard to mobile banking adoption, student sample is appropriate since several studies have confirmed that a typical internet banking user is a relatively young educated user (Cruz et al., 2010).”
Factors Affecting Individuals to Adopt Mobile Banking: Empirical Evidence from the Utaut Model (2012, background): “The reason is men appear more task-oriented than women and electronic banking services are typically motivated by goal achievement [Cruz et al. 2010].”
Online shopping drivers and barriers for older adults: Age and gender differences (2014, background): “Therefore, consistency with the user’s previous habits is a critical factor affecting the acceptance of an innovation (Cruz et al., 2010). If a new IT service is too complex, users will resist using it (Joseph, 2010). Therefore, the usage barrier will negatively affect older adults’ intentions to sh”
Factors influencing adoption of mobile banking by Jordanian bank customers: Extending UTAUT2 with trust (2017, methodology): “…solutions enabling banks to efficiently serve their customers with best quality and within large regions, particularly where there are restrictions in the term of Internet networks or establishing traditional branches (Cruz et al., 2010; Laukkanen and Cruz, 2009; Wessels and Drennan, 2010).”
Mobile-banking adoption by Iranian bank clients (2014, background): “But in Curran and Meuter (2005) and Wessels and Drennan’s (2010) study, this hypothesis has not been confirmed.”
Consumer adoption of mobile banking in Jordan: Examining the role of usefulness, ease of use, perceived risk and self-efficacy (2016, background): “The prevalence in MB could be attributed to the ability of such technology to launch a variety of financial services over a wider geographical area, especially where there is a problem regarding Internet connections, or where setting up branches is difficult and not feasible (Cruz et al., 2010; Wess”
Mobile banking adoption: A literature review (2015, background): “Cruz et al. (2010) identify the difference between m-banking and m-payments and argue that, if a bank is not directly involved in the instrumental gratification of a service offered, it is usually called a “mobile payment (m-payment).”
Predicting the intention to use mobile banking in India (2018, background): “Cruz et al. (2010) TAM and diffusion of innovation Brazil Perception of cost, risk, low perceived relative advantage, and complexity are the main reasons for the reluctance to use mobile banking.”
Explaining adoption of mobile banking with the theory of trying, general self-confidence, and cynicism (2017, background): “…influences (e.g., social norms, mass media, and social media), and environmental/situational factors (e.g., trust and perceived risk) (AlAjam and MdNor, 2015; Andrews and Bianchi, 2013; Cruz et al., 2010a, 2010b; Kaushik and Rahman, 2015; Laukkanen and Kiviniemi, 2010; Robertson et al., 2016).”