Consumers’ Acceptance of Mobile Payment in Malaysia
In the new global economy, smartphone has become an important element to how we live in our life. Smartphones now are more than just a texting machines, while they are mini computers, personal assistants and shopping carts which can pay by it. Mobile payment has been widely used in most western countries. India and China which are Asian countries with the highest population have begun to implement mobile payment in their civic lifestyle. For example, China has widely used their resource in mobile payments such as WeChatPay, AliPay, and others. Hence, Malaysia which is aim to become an advanced country only makes up a small presence in mobile payment.
In 2017, AliPay which cashless online payment system solution which is popular in China has landed in Malaysia. This explains the mobile payment trends has slowly been introduced to Malaysian. Malaysians can use their smartphone while looking up a product, coupons or deals, compare prices, and especially make payment. It helps to make better shopping decisions and shopping trips quicker. Although mobile payment is convenient and time saving for consumers, they are not always readily accepted or used by consumers. Since some of the Malaysian who do not want to make any changes in their monetary transactions, it makes them refuse to implement usage of mobile payment in their daily life.
Therefore, this study set out to investigate the consumers’ acceptance of mobile payment in Malaysia. The study was conducted in the form of survey, with data collected through the questionnaire that collected.
In recent years, mobile payment becomes popular in the world and three leading mobile payment platform exist in modern society, NFC payment, QR-code payment, and online banking. Then it refers to brief development both in China and in U.S.
2.1. Mobile Payment
Mobile payments are regulated transactions that take place on the mobile device. In the present study, “Mobile Payment” is defined as a process of payment for product or service via a portable electronic device like a singular smartphone and it can also be used to transfer money to your friend or family (Mobile Payment, 2017). Devices can be a tablet, smartwatch and some kinds of credit cards. Mobile payments can be an alternative to cash, cheques, credit cards and debit cards and can make possible new opportunities for commerce convenience. Most mobile payment depends on the internet, which means if the devices are out of services, the mobile payment does work. The mobile payment has several payment methods such as NFC, QR-code, and online banking (Huang, 2017).
2.1.1. NFC Payment
NFC payments are transaction made via NFC, so these devices need to support NFC hardware requirements before making payments. The NFC has a basic hardware requirement to enables devices to establish communication with each other when within 4 inches. Those devices have support NFC technology, and smartphones usually support it. Today, some NFC payments include Apple Pay, Google Wallet and NFC credit cards (Huang, 2017). Apple Pay can only run on Apple products and provide users with a high level of security. For example, Apple Pay only available for iPhone, iWatch, and iPad. Then, Google produces Android Pay, which supports Android devices, NFC and performs the same functions as Apple Pay. These two methods of NFC payment rely on the network, and NFC credit cards can work in the Internet or network environment that is not popular such as Asia. Therefore, NFC credit card proof is more useful than Apple Pay and Android Pay because there is no internet requirement.
2.1.2. QR-Code Payment
QR-Code takes up a new generation of wireless payments in the accounting system (Huang, 2017). In this payment plan, businesses can consider commodity process, compile transaction information into two-dimensional codes, and print them on a paper. Payments can be completed by sellers scanning the QR-Code in the payee’s personal phone to gain the money or buyers scanning the printed seller’s QR-code photograph to pay (Okazaki, Li, & Hirose, 2012). QR-Code payment technology sounds like a new technology, but in fact, it has already existed since the early 1990s in South Korea and Japan. Although this payment method accounts for 95% of its market, QR-Code has also started to be launched in China. Its popularity is by no means accidental. Users can install QR-Code recognition software, simply by brush to complete the transaction (QR code, n.d.).
QR Code means the trademark for a type of the two-dimensional barcode first invented for the automotive industry. A QR code contains much meaningful information using four standardized encoding modes to store those large amounts of data. The encoding methods are numeric, alphanumeric, byte/binary, and Kanji (Huang, 2017). The QR-Code can stores huge information, making it a good choice for mobile payment.
WeChat Pay, the innovative payment product on WeChat, Tencent Inc’s popular instant-messaging software, become WeChat and Tencent’s first three-party payment platform TenPay (WeChat, n.d.). With WeChat Pay, the user’s smartphone becomes a magic wallet, the user not only can communicate and share with friends but also can use it for making payment. AliPay, the main third-party platform, established in 2004 (Huang, 2017) by Alibaba group and its founder Jack Ma. It solved the problem of consumers’ disbelief about online shopping.
2.1.3. Online Banking
Online banking allows a user to execute financial transactions via the internet. It also is known as “internet banking” or “web banking”. An online bank offers clients just about every service traditionally available through a local branch, including deposits, which is done online or through the mail and online bill payment. For instance, users manage traditional banking business and emerging business by using the application of information technology (Tanveer, 2009). Clients safely and quickly manage at home demand and deposit, cheques, credit cards and personal investment. It significantly reduces bank operating costs and efficiently improves the profitability of banks. Moreover, it is conducive to service innovation, to provide clients with a variety of personalized services.
PayPal, one of the online banking application for mobile payment is a subsidiary of eBay who aims to achieve safe, straightforward and rapid online payment through email. PayPal, the most reliable online email account to reduce the risk of online fraud. It provides the world’s most extensive online payment platform, receives foreign trade funds quickly and easily, and tracking the flow of funds.
In this study, the dependent variable is acceptance intention, while independent variables perceived emotion, risk, and usefulness. Consumers have to face the uncertainty of conducting transactions on m-commerce (Chong, Chan, & Ooi, 2012). During the red envelope war between Tencent and Alibaba, mobile payment security was the greatest concern of Chinese mobile internet users (Wu, Liu, & Huang, 2017). Consumers were primarily concerned that their personal information and smartphone bank accounts and money will be stolen. Perceived usefulness reflects consumers’ cognitive assessment of the superiority of mobile payment system. The technology acceptance model which derived from Davis, 1989 is most frequently used to predict user behavior intentions to adopt or accept mobile payment. In the TAM, perceived usefulness is a key variable for predicting consumer acceptance and continuance intention of mobile payments (Schierz, Schilke, & Wirtz, 2010). Emotional changes are followed by behavioral avoidance or approach. Positive emotions and hedonic benefits are one of the most valuable predictors of consumer-oriented technology use and mobile technology use (Venkatesh, Y.L.Thong, & Xu, 2012). Thus, we hypothesize:
H1. Consumer perceived risk is negatively correlated with their willingness to accept mobile payment.
H2. Consumers think the usefulness is positively related to their willingness to accept mobile payments.
H3. Consumers’ positive emotion has a positive impact on their acceptance intend toward mobile payment.
The survey was conducted in the offline form. The questionnaire is given to the university student which is the University of Malaya as respondent. 100 students who studying in University of Malaya were recruited for this study. This is because university student is the person who always uses this method. In the future, university student will use the mobile payment in their lifestyle.
Each factor was measured with multiple items. The measures of perceived risk were derived from Wu and Wang (2005). Five items of perceived usefulness were adapted from Schierz et al. (2010) and Liebana-Cabanillas et al. (2014). Three items of acceptance intention toward mobile payment were adapted from Schierz et al. (2010) and Venkatesh et al. (2012). The positive emotion scale including four measures was revised from Sun and Zhang (2006). Each item was measured on a five-point Likert scale from 1 (Strongly Agree) to 5 (Strongly Disagree). There were about 9 questions in the questionnaire. There are two sections in the questionnaire. Section A is about demographic characteristics and usage of mobile payment. Another section is about based on the research.
5. Analysis and Findings
A range of respondent data is obtained and analyzed as shown in Table 1 below:
Use Mobile Payment before
Type of mobile payments
Frequent in using mobile payment
Once every 2-3 days
Once every 4-5 days
Once every week
Once a month
Less than once a month
Not even once
Questionnaire data were collected from 100 respondents which are the student of University Malaya. As can be seen from the table above, more than half of them are male and only 44 of female respondents. A minority of respondent (13%) aged between 18 and 21 years old, while those aged 22 to 25 accounted for 58%. In addition, 29 respondents range from 26 to 29 years of age. Furthermore, 88 % of respondent used to pay by mobile phone while only 12% did not use mobile payment in their lifetime. In 88 respondents who previously used mobile payments, most used online banking through mobile devices, and 30 of them are using NFC Payment such as Samsung Pay. Therefore, only 15 respondents paid using QR code. Table 1 shows 20 respondents use mobile payment every day, 12 of them pay by mobile phone once every 2 to 3 days. 15 of respondent paid less than once a month using their mobile phones or once a month. The majority of respondent use mobile payment once a week.
5.1. Perceived Risk
The figure shows that the respondent is under 50% dissatisfied with the view that “mobile payment would put my privacy at risk”. Of the 100 respondents who completed the questionnaire, just only 12% of respondents agree that “mobile payment would put my privacy at risk”, while 15% of respondents have no opinion about it. The data found that 73 respondents disagreed with the “mobile payment in monetary transaction online has potential risk”, 12 respondent agreed and the remaining 15 respondents was neutral on this point. Only 12% of respondents agreed that “mobile payment has significant risk in making purchasing online” and 73 respondents disagreed with it. In addition, only 12% of respondents said they chose not to agree that “using mobile payment to make purchase online is a risky choice”, while only 9% said they did not know it and left 79 respondents fully agreed with this. Based on the figure, one can conclude that more than 50% of respondents do not agree that mobile payments have perceived risk. Therefore, only small number of respondents indicated that mobile payment is already at risk.
5.2. Perceived Emotion
In the graph above, most respondents have positive emotion when using their mobile payment. “Using mobile payment is fun” is the statement that chooses by 76 respondents, only 12 respondents do not agree with the statement. Almost two-thirds of the respondents (76%) were happy with mobile payment, and 12 of respondents disagreed. In addition, over half of those surveyed indicated that they agree with “using mobile payment is pleasant” while 12% of the respondents disagreed. About 74 respondents were excited about using mobile payment and only 12 of the respondents did not feel excited when using mobile payment. Approximately 10 % of those surveyed did not comment on this question.
5.3. Perceived usefulness
According to the above data, 73% of respondents agree that mobile payment helps them pay faster, while only 5% of respondents disagree with this statement. Of the 100 respondents who completed the questionnaire, about 65% of respondents think mobile payment makes them easier to trade and 30 respondents disagree. As a result, 65% of respondents agree that “mobile payment can increase the efficiency of online transactions” and 30% of them disagreed. In addition, about 75% agreed that “mobile payment will improve my productivity” and 72% of them agree that “using mobile payment to pay for my online transaction is useful in general”. In another way, only 12 % disagreed that “mobile payments will increase my productivity” and “using mobile payments to pay for my online transaction is generally helpful”.
5.4. Acceptation Intention
As can be seen from Figure 4, 88 respondents had previously used mobile payment. As a result, most of the respondents agreed with “I intend to use it”, “I want to use it in a few months instead of another mobile payment” and “I would use it in next month”. In response to Question 4, only 4 out of 12 respondents who did not comment on the use of mobile payment. As a result, only 6 of them disagreed completely with the three claims that they found mobile payment is totally useless in their lives. Of the 100 respondents who surveyed, less than 10% of those surveyed did not comment on “if I have access to the mobile payment.”
The purpose of this study is to determine whether consumer accept an innovative mobile payment in term of perceived risk, perceived usefulness and emotion. Based on the result, we can conclude that perceived risk, perceived usefulness and positive emotion have relative influences on consumer acceptance of mobile payment. In contrast, consumer positive emotion and perceived usefulness strongly affect their acceptance of mobile payment. Perceived risk has relative slightly negative influence consumer acceptance intention. In the finding, only small group of consumer seriously refuse to use mobile payment in their payment process. As a result, Malaysia banks and other mobile payment organizations need to ensure that Malaysia consumers are fully aware of, understand any payment guarantees that are provided as this can be used to overcome Malaysia consumer refuse to use mobile payment and leads to wider adoption. As a conclusion, Malaysia consumer is ready to integrate mobile payment into their daily lifestyle.
Chong, A. Y.-L., Chan, F. T., & Ooi, K.-B. (2012). Predicting consumer decisions to adopt mobile commerce: Cross country empirical examination between China and Malaysia. Decision Support Systems, 53(1), 34-43.
Huang, J. (2017). How Mobile Payment is changing the world. Student Thesis, Papers and Projects Computer Science).
Liebana-Cabanillas, F., Sanchez-Fernandez, J., & Munoz-Leiva, F. (2014). The moderating effect of experience in the adoption of mobile payment tools in Virtual Social Networks: The m-Payment Acceptance Model in Virtual Social Networks (MPAM-VSN). International Journal of Information Management, 34(2), 151-166.
Mobile Payment. (2017, 12 29). Retrieved from Investopedia: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/mobile-payment.asp
Okazaki, S., Li, H., & Hirose, M. (2012). Benchmarking the Use of QR Code in Mobile Promotion. Journal of Advertising Research, 52(1), 102-117.
QR code. (n.d.). Retrieved from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code
Riquelme, H. E., & Rios, R. E. (2010). The moderating effect of gender in the adoption of mobile banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28(5), pp 328-341. doi:doi:10.1108/02652321011064872
Schierz, P. G., Schilke, O., & Wirtz, B. W. (2010). Understanding consumer acceptance of mobile payment services: An empirical analysis. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9(3), 209-216.
Sun, H., & Zhang, P. (2006). The role of moderating factors in user technology acceptance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(2), 53-78.
Tanveer, A. (2009). Electronic customer relationship management in online banking. Lulea University of Technology, 5(23), 435-448.
Venkatesh, V., Y.L.Thong, J., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178.
WeChat. (n.d.). Retrieved from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat
Wu, J., Liu, L., & Huang, L. (2017). ConsumerConsumer acceptance of mobile payment across time: Antecedents and moderating role of diffusion stages. Industrial Management & Data Systems,, 117(8), 1761-1776.
Wu, J.-H., & Wang, S.-C. (2005). What drives mobile commerce?: An empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42(5), 719-729.