TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE OF FINANCIAL

TECHNOLOGY (FINTECH) FOR PAYMENT SERVICES

AMONG EMPLOYED FRESH GRADUATES
Shamsurin Ahmad1, Sharina Tajul Urus2* and
Sharifah Nazatul Faiza Syed Mustapha Nazri2
Faculty of Accountancy,
1

Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia

2
Faculty of Accountancy,
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Kampus Puncak Alam, Malaysia
ABSTRACT

The Fourth Industrial Revolution (IR 4.0), which is complementary to the

technological revolution, has given birth to Financial Technology (Fintech).
Numerous advantages are offered by Fintech, yet the adoption rate is still
low. This is especially from the employed fresh graduates’ perspectives that
are regarded as the computer literate and IT savvy’s group. This research
aims to examine the factors that affect the technology acceptance of Fintech
payment services. The research attempts to measure the relationships
between performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence,
facilitating condition and consumers’ trust with the adoption of Fintech.
Based upon the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
(UTAUT), the quantitative method was employed via online survey of 179
respondents. The result showed that consumers’ trust had the highest impact
on the adoption of Fintech payment services, followed by performance
expectancy and effort expectancy. In contrast, facilitating conditions and
social influence showed an insignificant relationship with the adoption of
Fintech payment services. This finding would enhance the awareness for
people to become more open towards the acceptance of Fintech for their
daily transactions. Fintech companies are expected to develop into more
secure services and design better products in becoming a cashless society.

Keywords: UTAUT, consumers’ trust, financial technology, Fintech, Fintech

payment services adoption, employed fresh graduates
ARTICLE INFO
Article History:
Received: 18 May 2021
Accepted: 14 July 2021
Published: 31 August 2021
* Corresponding Author: Sharina Tajul Urus. E-mail: [email protected]
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

INTRODUCTION

The Fourth Industrial Revolution (IR 4.0), which is complementary to

the technological revolution, has given birth to Financial Technology
(Fintech). Fintech is a phenomenon fueled by the World Wide Web and
mobile Internet revolution. Fintech is used to describe new technology
that seeks to improve and automate the delivery and use of financial
services. PwC (2016) postulated that Fintech is a combination of financial
and technological innovation, where technology is implemented into
the products and services that financial institutions usually provide to
consumers. It is a strategic approach to ensure that the financial institution
can provide efficient and effective financial services. Meanwhile, Dorfleitner,
Hornif, Schmitt, and Weber (2017) suggested four categories of Fintech
which include asset management, financing, payments, and other types based
on the distinctive business models. For instance, Fintech covers a broad
range of services, including payments, cryptocurrency, peer-to-peer (P2P)
lending, Insurtech, crowdfunding and others. Fintech payment services cover
various functionalities that are kept in mobile phone technology for making
payments, e-Wallets, peer-to-peer transfers (real-time money transfer
between two people) and bank transfers. This platform is an initiative that
has been implemented to boost the economy and, at the same time, to keep
updated with technological advancements in this digital era.

In Europe, the implementation of Fintech in financial services is

snowballing, which is parallel with high penetration rates of mobile phones
in this digital era (Khraim, Shoubaki, & Khraim, 2011). The number of
Fintech usage through mobile phones has risen due to its direct connectivity
with the internet. In Asia, numerous studies on the adoption of Fintech
payment in developed countries such as Singapore, Korea, Brazil, China,
and Taiwan have been carried out. For instance, the Investments in private
Fintech firms based in the Asia-Pacific increased by 9.1% to $1.4 billion
during the second quarter of 2020, compared to the first quarter of year 2020
as reported by S&P Global Market Intelligence (Faridi, 2020).

The presence of Fintech in Malaysia is still nascent but growing

rapidly. The Director of Financial Development and Innovation, Bank
Negara Malaysia (BNM) had stated that regulations have been issued
by BNM and the Securities Commission of Malaysia (SCM) to support

28
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

Fintech through the introduction of a Fintech regulatory sandbox (Fintech

News Malaysia, 2020). The regulatory sandbox allows Fintech platforms to
experiment with their solutions in a controlled environment, accompanied
by appropriate safeguards for a limited period. The SCM has also released
guidelines for P2P financing and equity crowdfunding. Fintech is associated
with faster and cheaper transactions, but based on the PwC (2016), only
26% of Malaysians used those services, while another 74% of the citizens
still doubted using technological equipment to conduct certain payment
transactions especially using Fintech platforms. This percentage is measured
by comparing e-payment usage in countries such as Singapore, Finland,
South Korea, and England, where Malaysia stands last (PwC, 2016). This
problem has arisen due to information security and privacy threats even
though users are open-minded toward Fintech services.

The digital disruption brought by Fintech companies makes the

traditional financial transaction less favorable as it is time consuming and
involves complex procedures. As most of the time employed fresh graduates
are at the workplace, they have insufficient time to conduct financial
transactions over the counter. Therefore, these is a better alternative for
them. Other than that, since Fintech disrupts traditional financial matters,
it is then introduced as the future of financial technology. It is essential
for fresh graduates to prepare themselves with complementary skills and
competencies to handle these technologies, as they are the ones who will be
working within these industries that are regarded as computer literate and IT
savvy (Mathews, 2020). The Malaysian Ministry of Education (2019) had
reported that the adoption of Fintech is still relatively low, compared to the
yearly increment of fresh graduates in spite it is becoming the major financial
alternative for consumers and businesses in Malaysia, (Jin, Seong, & Kin,
2019). Acknowledging this fact, hence, an investigation on the acceptance
of Fintech by employed fresh graduates is inevitable.

In a nutshell, from the discussion above it is crystal clear that the

adoption rate of Fintech is still low and findings from developing countries
such as Malaysia remain to be interesting, especially from the context of
employed fresh graduates. Therefore, this research aimed to examine the
factors that affect the acceptance of Fintech payment services. It was also
an attempt to measure the relationships between performance expectancy,
effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating condition and consumers’

29
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

trust with the adoption of Fintech through the lens of the Unified Theory
of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). This research focussed
solely on Fintech payment services, which is a subsegment of alternative
payment methods.

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. The next section

presents the theoretical foundation and literature review. This is followed
by hypothesis development and the research model. Subsequently, the
description of the methodology is outlined. The result is presented in the
following section. Finally, the discussion and conclusions are presented.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Fintech is derived from the combination of finance and technology, implying

the implementation of innovative technologies such as smartphones and the
Internet in improving the productivity and efficiency of financial services
without the financial institution as an intermediary (Chuang, Liu, & Koa,
2016). Fintech refers to companies that provide financial services, which
primarily focus on the technology platform for innovative financial services
products. It is not limited to specific areas (e.g., financing) or business
models, but covers various high-tech systems in financial industries
like mobile payments, loans, financing, money transfers, and even asset
management (Arner, Barberis, & Buckley, 2015). Arner et al. (2015) had
posited the differences between traditional financial services and Fintech,
where it is not a mere combination of information technology and financial
services, but the implementation of technology into traditional services
to expand their context. Fintech covers various transactions, including
insurance technology, financial data, payment and banking systems and
mobile banking, with payment services being the largest subcategory
covered under Fintech (Szakiel, 2018). Fintech payment services have
improved the way people do business. The tools provided by Fintech enable
the consumers to track, manage and facilitate their finances remotely.

Fintech in Malaysia

The rise of Fintech in Malaysia, such as online banking and electronic

payments, has contributed to an increase in the competitiveness of

30
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

technology in Malaysia. Financial institutions offer services that continue

to challenge and react to consumers’ attitudes towards new technological
products to gain market opportunities (Chong, William-Choo, Yip, Chan,
Julian-Teh, & Ng, 2019). Digital payments and mobile wallets are the most
popular services currently on the rise in Malaysia, with many local Fintech
companies working hard to expand their portfolio and create unique products
for their local daily use (Rabin, 2020).

The Malaysian government has also taken some initiative to promote

the use of Fintech. For instance, the government had announced an allocation
of RM750 million to promote the adoption of Fintech payment services
(Fong, 2020). Fong further showed that RM50 was credited to approximately
15 million Malaysians’ e-wallet accounts in July 2020. Meanwhile, the
Malaysia Digital Economy Corporation (MDEC) has also created a vibrant
Fintech ecosystem and leveraged the expertise and knowledge in the field
of Islamic Finance. This is important as Malaysia is ranked 32nd out of
121 (best performing countries) leading the group of upper-middle-income
countries (Network Readiness Index, 2019). The framework evidenced that
the Malaysian government had a great investment in the use of advanced
technologies. These strategies are employed to promote Malaysia to become
an advanced country that can keep up with other developed countries such
as Singapore, United States and Japan. Hence, it is crucial for everyone in
Malaysia to take the first step to adopt this technology as a contribution to
boost the Malaysian economy.

Factors Influencing the Adoption of Fintech

The adoption of Fintech payment services will turn traditional

transactions into a new and modern approach to enhance the efficiency of
transactions (Kim, Choi, Park, & Yeon, 2016). The benefits provided by
Fintech, can drive of the adoption of the technology. Following are some
of the factors influencing the adoption of Fintech.

Performance expectancy
Performance expectancy is described as the extent to which a consumer
is expected to be improved using a program or technology to achieve job
or performance gains (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003). The
relationship between performance expectancy and the adoption of Fintech

31
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

has been the subject of many research questions and the difference has
always been in the context of Fintech application. All hypothesized that
performance expectancy predicts the adoption of Fintech and most of them
found evidence for this assumption (Abdullah, Rahman, & Rahim, 2018;
Keng-Soon, Choo-Yen San, Pui-Yee, Hong-Leong, & The Shwu-Shing,
2019). People tend to use new technology when they believe that with the
help of the application or the system, they can do their work more efficiently.
Consumers are more likely to use and embrace new technology if they
believe that the technologies are more helpful and useful in their everyday
routines (Alalwan, Dwivedi, & Rana, 2016). Individuals have been keen on
the advantages that the system can provide, as opposed to other systems, and,
more significantly, the advantages of the ease that the system can provide,
which can be used everywhere and any time.

Effort expectancy
Effort expectancy is defined as “the degree of ease associated with the
use of a system” (Venkatesh et al., 2003). Previous studies on the adoption
of mobile applications supported the idea that the effort expectancy has an
impact on the adoption of technology (Yu, 2012). It is supported by Davis
(1989), where an individual adopts new technology not just by anticipating
how good the system is, but also by how much the system is not difficult
to use and requires free effort. The positive influence of effort expectancy
on the adoption of technology has been frequently discussed in previous
studies (Abrahão, Moriguchi, & Andrade, 2016; Abdullah et al., 2018;
Yahaya & Ahmad, 2019). Individuals are looking into technology that is
easy to manage and understand to ensure that all activities are performed
in accordance with what has been expected. In this study, effort expectancy
refers to users using Fintech payment services with ease and interacting
with the technology without any doubt (Zhou, Lu, & Wang, 2010).

Social influences
Social influences refer to the extent to which an individual perceives
those important others believe he or she should apply the new system
(Venkatesh et al., 2003). It is where others’ opinions or suggestions
regarding a given system or technology can influence another person to
adopt the technology. The effect of adoption of new technology suggests
that consumers are not only drawn by the advantages of Fintech but are also
affected by the social circle of users who use it as well, such as family and

32
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

friends (Chuang, Liu, & Kao, 2016). The information and encouragement
provided by the surrounding people play a dynamic role in contributing to
the understanding of the consumer as well as influencing one’s behavior
in accepting the technology such as Fintech payment services. While
some researchers have found social influence as the most salient predictor
(Abrahão et al., 2016; Abdullah et al., 2018; Keng-Soon et al., 2019; Yahaya
& Ahmad, 2019), others have found that social influence had no significant
influence (Chen, Chen, & Chen, 2019; Alalwan et al., 2017). Social influence
cannot be substantial if changes are just implemented. Thus, people with
more confidence and experience are less influenced by social pressure.
(Alalwan et al., 2017).

Facilitating conditions
Facilitating conditions are designated as the degree to which an
individual believes that organizational and technical infrastructure exists
to support the use of a system (Venkatesh et al., 2003). For instance, the
use of Fintech like online banking platforms usually requires a special kind
of skill, resources, and technical facilities to ensure smooth transactions
(Alalwan et al., 2017). Similarly, for Fintech payment services, where
facilitating conditions are needed to make it possible to use the services
more efficiently. Several studies have shown that facilitating conditions have
a positive and significant impact on the adoption of technology (Abdullah
et al., 2018; Yahaya & Ahmad, 2019; Zhou et al., 2019). Most researchers
have found evidence for this relationship (Abdullah et al., 2018; Yahaya
& Ahmad, 2019), but Zhou, Owusu-Marfo, Asante Antwi, Antwi, Kachie,
and Ampon-Wireko, (2019) concluded that facilitating conditions had no
significant influence.

Consumers’ trust
Consumers’ trust is defined as a customer’s belief in integrity,
benevolence, and the capability of a system to enhance their readiness to
depend on technology for financial transactions (Gefen & Straub, 2003).
Stewart and Jürjens (2018) believed that consumers’ trust is crucial when
involving virtual transactions and becomes a barrier in the adoption of
new technology. Trust has been extensively studied and confirmed to be a
critical factor foreseeing consumers’ insights and the adoption of technology
(Stewart & Jürjens, 2018; AlHogail, 2018). Besides, consumers’ trust is
confirmed as the key factor in determining the likelihood of adoption of
technology (Stewart & Jürjens, 2018). Additionally, it is essential to maintain

33
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

a secure feeling to ensure that the deal done between two parties is safe
and reliable when performing a financial transaction as Stewart and Jürjens
(2018) had urged that those dramatic changes in technology are associated
with an increase in cyber-attacks. This phenomenon could bring huge
economic damages to individuals, which then impair their trust towards
these services (Kranz, Murmann, & Michahelles, 2013).

Theoretical Background

The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology

(UTAUT)
Venkatesh et al. (2003) introduced the Unified Theory of Acceptance
and Use of Technology (UTAUT) in 2003. Figure 1 below depicts the
four constructs that will play a significant role as factors influencing the
acceptance and usage of technology. He further added that UTAUT is
alleged to account for 70 percent of technology adoption. UTAUT comprises
performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating
conditions. From the theory, four key moderators are included, which are
gender, age, experience, and voluntariness of use.

Figure 1: The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology

(Venkatesh et al., 2003)

In the context of this research, UTAUT as it deemed to serve as an

excellent mechanism to measure the adoption of Fintech payment services
among employed fresh graduates. Compared with other theories, UTAUT
is more complex and will give a clearer view and a greater understanding
34
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

of the adoption of Fintech payment services. However, UTAUT forgoes

the security requirement, which is vital when considering adoption of
technology (Shin, 2010). Consumers need to trust the services provided by
a system to ensure that their transactions are safe and protected from any
cyber threats. There are also four key moderators to the model: gender, age,
experience, and voluntariness of use.

Risky Technology Adoption Models (RTA)

Security problems have been commonly debated in the acceptance
of new technology, such as mobile payments, electronic commerce and
mobile banking, yet risk-related concerns have received less attention. The
impact of safety awareness is greater than technological risks, as it plays
a key role in the adoption of technology (Gupta & Xu, 2010). Likewise,
security issues such as cyber-attack could bring substantial economic losses
to consumers. Consumers’ trust is vital in the adoption of technology to
instill user confidence towards the services, as they would believe that
their personal data is well protected (Stewart & Jürjens, 2018). From this
theory, consumers’ trust was included as an independent variable to be tested
further, which makes a total of five independent variables. Figure 2 shows
the Risky Technology Adoption Models (RTA).

Figure 2: Risky Technology Adoption Models (Gupta & Xu, 2010)

Due to the limitation of UTAUT that forgoes the need for security
within the construct, the RTA model was employed to complement the
absence of this dimension in deriving the research framework (see Figure
3). It is because consumers’ trust is closely related to security concerns.

35
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

Based on the RTA models, security concern is one of the elements

used to predict the adoption of a specific technology. Therefore, this
study focussed on five independent variables, which were performance
expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions and
consumers’ trust as factors influencing the adoption of Fintech payment
services among employed fresh graduates.

Research Hypothesis

Performance expectancy
The construct of performance expectancy is one of the key predictors
towards the adoption of technology. Prior research has examined this
relationship and results provided positive results in the context of mobile
payments (Slade et al., 2015) and distribution of Zakat through Fintech
(Yahaya & Ahmad, 2019). However, there is no evidence of this relationship
in the context of Fintech in the context of payment services solely. Since
Fintech payment services enable consumers to perform fast payment
transactions, such expectations can influence the adoption of technology.
It is because people tend to use something or technology when benefits
are derived from the usage. Hence, the following hypothesis was created:

H1: Performance expectancy significantly influences the adoption of

Fintech payment services among employed fresh graduates.

Effort expectancy
Prior studies on the adoption of Fintech have supported the idea that
effort expectancy affects the adoption of technology (Abdullah et al., 2018;
Abrahão et al., 2016) but not in terms of Fintech payment services solely.
Since Fintech payment services are easy to use, understandable and easy
to communicate with, consumers’ minimal effort to make payments will
influence the adoption of technology. Other than that, effort expectancy is
directly linked to the use of Fintech payment services among employed
fresh graduates. This is because the use of Fintech payment services for
daily transactions is most likely influenced by how simple or complicated
it is to conduct the payment transaction and in the shortest time possible.
Hence, if users realize that it is effortless to use the services provided by
Fintech, they might not refrain from using it. Thus, the following hypothesis
was proposed:

36
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

H2: Effort expectancy significantly influences the adoption of Fintech

payment services among employed fresh graduates.

Social influence
Prior researchers had integrated social influence into their research
models in the context of the adoption of mobile technological services and
have found that it brought a positive impact on the adoption of technology
(Abdullah et al., 2018; Abrahão et al., 2016; Keng-Soon et al., 2019; Yahaya
& Ahmad, 2019). Dang et al. (2017) had argued that individuals believe that
others want them to participate in certain activities; thus, social influence
is seen as a significant factor affecting consumers’ behavior. In a study on
Fintech adoption in investment among Malaysians, Abdullah et al. (2018)
found evidence to support the relationship between social influence and the
adoption of technology in conducting investment activities. How people
act or respond in their immediate environment is primarily based on the
influence of the immediate social environment on what they do or not. The
next hypothesis formulated was:

H3: Social influence significantly influences the adoption of Fintech

payment services among employed fresh graduates.

Facilitating conditions
Abdullah et al. (2018) confirmed this relationship among the
acceptance of users regarding Zakat distribution among “asnaf” through a
Fintech platform. The study indicated that people are likely to have a high
intention to adopt technology, but due to insufficient facilities such as mobile
phones and technical knowledge resulting non-adoption of technology.
Joshua and Koshy (2011) in their study of mobile banking had stated that
easy access to computers and the Internet results in a higher adoption rate.
As a result, higher facilitating conditions are expected to lead to higher
adoption of technologies as well as Fintech payment services. Based on
the findings, the following hypothesis was proposed:

H4: Facilitating conditions significantly influence the adoption of Fintech

payment services among employed fresh graduates.

37
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

Consumers’ trust
Consumers’ trust can be defined as the belief or confidence of the
user in the degree to which a particular service can be regarded as having
no security or privacy threats (Gao & Yang, 2014). It is where consumers
believe in mobile services with the expectation that the technology will
be risk-free and will, in some ways, deliver intangible benefits at an
unspecified time in the future. Consumers’ trust is vital in adoption of
technology, especially in monetary transactions. This is due to security
structure reliability, where consumers need to trust that they would not have
to encounter any hacker attacks and potential losses related to the adoption
of new technology (Stewart & Jürjens, 2018). Hence, higher consumers’
trust is expected to lead to higher adoption of Fintech payment services.
Based on the findings, the following hypothesis was proposed:

H5: Consumers’ trust significantly influences the adoption of Fintech

payment services among employed fresh graduates.

The following is the research framework used to test the hypotheses

stated above,

Figure 3 : Research Framework

38
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

METHODOLOGY

Data Collection Method and Sampling

This study was conducted in Malaysia. The unit of analysis was

employed fresh graduates in Malaysia. Employed fresh graduates were
selected because it was the highest compared to the other employment
status of fresh graduates. Thus, respondents were randomly selected from
employed fresh graduates. Questionnaires were sent to 600 respondents. Out
of the total 600 questionnaires distributed, 179 completed questionnaires
were returned. Based on Sekaran and Bougie (2016), this study required
at least 384 samples. One hundred seventy-nine (179) useful responses
from the yielded a response rate of 30% (179/600 x100). As the acceptable
response rate was 29.8%, this rate was deemed acceptable and sufficient to
represent the population (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016).

Survey Instruments

This study used a questionnaire survey as the research instrument. The

questionnaire consisted of three main sections; Section A, Section B and
Section C, while Section B was divided into six subsections that represented
the measurement for each independent variable, where each subsection
consisted of 4 questions. Section A required general information on the
demographic profile of the respondents, which included gender, age, level
of education, type of institution (graduated from), year of graduation, job
position, familiar Fintech payment services applications, usage frequencies
and the reasons for choosing Fintech payment services. Lastly, in Section C,
respondents were asked about their adoption of Fintech payment services
in their daily transactions. This section represented the dependent variable.
In determining the influencing factors on the adoption of Fintech payment
services, a 5-point Likert Scale was used ranging from “strongly disagree”
to “strongly agree”. Most of the questions were adopted from Venkatesh et
al. (2003) while some of the questions were adopted from the studies like
Grabner- Krauter and Faullant (2018), Marakarkandy et al. (2017) and Patel
and Patel (2018) (refer to Table 1).

39
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

Variable Measurement

The questionnaire was designed to include all the variables in this

study (i.e., Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, Social Influence,
Facilitating Condition, Consumers’ Trust and The Adoption of Fintech
Payment Services). Item measurement for the variables were adopted from
various studies (see Table 1 for details).

Table 1: Measurement Items

Construct Items References
Performance PE1 – I believe the Fintech payment service is useful in Martins et al.,
Expectancy my daily transactions. PE2 – Fintech payment service 2014; Venkatesh
(PE) enables me to perform my payment transactions et al., 2003; Zhou
faster. PE3 – Fintech payment service allows me to et al., 2010.
do multitasking, such as while working, I can also pay
my bills. PE4 – Fintech payment services would bring
me greater convenience.
Effort EE1 – The Fintech payment interface is clear and easy Venkatesh et al.,
Expectancy to understand. EE2 – I can master the Fintech payment 2003; Zhou et al.,
(EE) service within a short period of time. EE3 – Fintech 2010.
payment service is easy to be used by anyone. EE4 –
The HELP and tutorial guide functions in the Fintech
payment system facilitates me to use the system better.
Social Influence SI1 – People around me think I should use the Fintech Venkatesh et al.,
(SI) payment service. SI2 – My family members think I 2003; Zhou et al.,
should use the Fintech payment service. SI3 – social 2010.
media influences me to use the Fintech payment
service. SI4 – Advertisement in the mass media such
as in television, Internet, and radio influences me to
use Fintech payment service.
Facilitating FC1 – I use my mobile phone for the Fintech payment Venkatesh et al.,
Condition (FC) service. FC2 – I use other gadgets (laptop or tablet) for 2003.
Fintech payment service. FC3 – I do have the required
knowledge to use the Fintech payment service. FC4
– Customer service is always available to assist me.
Consumers’ CT1 – I feel secure using the Fintech payment services. Grabner-Krauter
Trust (CT) CT2 – I believe Fintech payment services do protect my & Faullant, 2008;
personal information. CT3 – I believe Fintech payment Marakarkandy et
services are safer than a cash basis. CT4 – I believe al., 2017,
in the security of Fintech payment service.
The Adoption AF1 – I prefer to use the Fintech payment service Marakarkandy et
of Fintech as compared to a cash basis while performing al., 2017; Patel
Payment transactions. AF2 – I intend to use the Fintech payment & Patel, 2018;
Services service very soon. AF3 – As an existing user, I will Venkatesh et al.,
(AF) continue using the Fintech payment system. AF4 2003.
– I rely on Fintech payment service for my future
transactions.

40
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

The data in this study were analyzed using the Statistical Package
for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25 software. In this study, descriptive
analysis was carried out on the influencing factors on the adoption of Fintech
payment services. Hypotheses were analyzed using correlation and multiple
regressions to examine the influence of performance expectancy, effort
expectancy, social influence, facilitating condition, consumers’ trust in the
adoption of Fintech payment services among employed fresh graduates.

RESULTS

Demographic Profile of Respondent

The questionnaires were circulated through the social media platform

to approximately 600 persons. The total number of responses received
was 200, but only 179 were usable as the remaining 21 responses received
were incomplete and were from students who were not working. Based on
Sekaran Bougie (2016), this population for the study was quite large and
required at least 384 samples. But due to movement restriction this study
only received 179 useful responses over the required sample, making it yield
a response rate of 30%. (179/600 x100). As an acceptable response rate is
29.8 % (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016), this rate was deemed acceptable, and it
was sufficient to represent the population. The respondent’s demographic
data were analyzed, which included gender, age, level of education, type
of institution (graduated from), year of graduation, job position, familiar
Fintech payment service application, frequency of usage and the reasons
for choosing Fintech instead of cash.

Fresh graduates in this study were defined as someone who has

started working after finishing his/her studies. Sometimes after finishing
the bachelor’s degree, graduates immediately pursue their education at the
master’s level and after that go to work. Hence, they are also fresh graduates.
Same goes to the PhD level where there is a fast-track PhD program,
where an excellent bachelor’s degree graduate is given the opportunity to
directly pursue his/her PhD without doing a master’s degree and after that
starts working. They also fresh graduates. Details of profiles are depicted
in Table 2.

41
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

Table 2: Demographic Profile of Respondents

Demographic variable Frequency Percentage
Gender Male 111 62%
Female 68 38%
Age (years) 25 years old and below 115 64.2%
26 to 35 years old 60 33.5%
36 to 45 years old 3 1.7%
46 years old and above 1 0.6%
Level of Education PhD/ Master 16 8.9%
Bachelor’s degree 141 78.8%
Diploma 13 7.3%
Certificate 7 3.9%
Other 2 1.1%
Type of Institution Public University (IPTA) 153 85.5%
(Graduated from)
Private University (IPTS) 18 10.1%
TVET 8 4.5%
Year of Graduating Below 1 year 41 22.9%
From 1 to 2 years 102 57.0%
From 2 to 3 years 36 20.1%
Job Position’s Level Management 54 30.2%
Professional 91 50.8%
Administrative 30 16.8%
Other 4 2.2%

42
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

Fintech Payment Services 0p5.4 142 79.3%

Application PayPal
No 37 20.7%
Yes 117 65.4%
Ipay88
No 62 34.6%
Yes 33 18.4%
Webcash
No 146 81.6%
Yes 149 83.2%
Boost
No 30 16.8%
Yes 166 92.7%
Touch ‘n Go E-Wallet
No 13 7.3%
Yes 40 22.3%
Fave
No 139 77.7%
Yes 110 61.5%
FPX
No 69 38.5%
Yes 65 36.3%
MOLPay
No 114 63.7%
Yes 140 78.2%
GrabPay
No 39 21.8%
Frequency of Usage of A few times a month 35 19.6%
Fintech Payment Services
A few times a week 79 44.1%
Once a day 52 29.1%
Several times a day 13 7.3%
R e a s o n s t o C h o o s e Cheap alternatives Yes 140 78.2%
Fintech Payment Services
No 39 21.8%
Fast transactions Yes 166 92.7%
No 13 7.3%
No need to bring a lot of cash Yes 115 64.2%
at work
No 64 35.8%
More secured Yes 112 62.6%
No 67 37.4%

Descriptive Analysis

The overall mean score of performance expectancy was 4.40, with

a standard deviation of 0.487, indicating that respondents believed the
performance expectancy or benefits could be gained from using Fintech

43
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

payment services (refer Table 3). Next, the overall mean score of effort
expectancy was 4.44 with a standard deviation of 0.465, indicating that
respondents believed ease of use of the Fintech payment services could
influence the adoption of Fintech payment services. Social influence scored
a mean of 4.18 and a standard deviation of 0.566 showing that respondents
believed people in their circle and the mass media had a high tendency
to influence the adoption of Fintech payment services among employed
fresh graduates. Moreover, the facilitating condition mean score was 4.37,
with a standard deviation of 0.603, indicating that respondents believed
the facilitating conditions related to Fintech payment services could help
them use the system better. Consumers’ trusts mean score was 4.29 with a
standard deviation of 0.595 implying that respondents only adopted Fintech
payment services when they are highly confident regarding system security.
The mean score for the adoption of Fintech payment services was 4.50 and
the standard deviation was 0.445 showing that the reliance of respondents
towards Fintech payment services was likely to increase the adoption of
the system among employed fresh graduates.

Table 3: Result of Construct Assessment

Standard Cronbach
Variables Mean Skewness Kurtosis
Deviation Alpha
1 Performance Expectancy 4.40 0.487 0.758 -1.019 1.156
2 Effort Expectancy 4.44 0.465 0.732 -1.033 1.145
3 Social Influence 4.18 0.566 0.703 -0.687 -.397
4 Facilitating Condition 4.37 0.603 0.708 -0.902 -.050
5 Consumers’ Trust 4.29 0.595 0.840 -1.363 2.532
6 Adoption of Fintech 4.50 0.445 0.702 -1.275 1.844
Payment Services
N= 179

All the 179 samples were assessed for normality of data based on
the completed questionnaires. The skewness and kurtosis values for all the
variables were between -3 and +3. These results indicated that the mean
scores of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence,
facilitating condition, consumers’ trust and the adoption of Fintech payment
services were normally distributed. This is because the range of skewness
and kurtosis of the normal data lied between -3.00 and +3.00 (Mustapha
& Siaw, 2012).

44
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

Validity Test

A validity test was performed to verify the instruments and data

used for the analysis. Since the critical value of the loading factor for the
rotation matrix was set to 0.4, any element that scored less than 0.4 were not
considered important. Based on this, all the items were above the acceptance
value of 0.4 and as shown in Table 4 below:

Table 4: Measurement of Model Output

Variables Items Factor Loading
Performance Expectancy PE1 .554
PE2 .673
PE3 .601
PE4 .620
Effort Expectancy EE1 .539
EE2 .660
EE3 .722
EE4 .495
Social Influences SI1 .672
SI2 .504
SI3 .546
SI4 .570
FC1 .501
Facilitating Conditions FC2 .682
FC3 .571
FC4 .617
Consumers’ Trust CT1 .695
CT2 .655
CT3 .582
CT4 .726
Adoption of Fintech Payment Services AF1 .536
AF2 .454
AF3 .415
AF4 .550

Reliability Test

Cronbach’s alpha value for performance expectancy (PE), effort

expectancy (EE), social influence (SI), facilitating condition (FC),
consumers’ trust (CT) and the adoption of Fintech payment services (AF)
45
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

were 0.758, 0.732, 0.703, 0.708 and 0.840, respectively. The results indicated
that the reliability for items PE, EE, SI, FC was acceptable, and CT was
good. Meanwhile, for the dependent variable, which is the adoption of
Fintech payment services (AF), the alpha value was 0.702. It also indicated
that all the items used in the dependent variable were reliable (George &
Mallery, 2003).

Correlation Analysis

Table 5 indicates the correlation between all the main variables in this
study. Two variables with bivariate correlation of 0.9 or more in the same
analysis should not be included (Pallant, 2011). Based on the results, there
was a significant positive little association between performance expectancy
and the adoption of Fintech payment services as r = 0.297, (p <0.001). Hence,
an increase in performance expectancy was associated with little increase
in the adoption of Fintech payment services and vice versa.

Table 5: Correlation Matrix

Variables AF PE EE SI FC CT
AF 1
PE .297** 1
EE .531** .340** 1
SI .256** .169* .269** 1
FC .149* .138 .149* .305** 1
CT .636** .292** .480** .351** .251** 1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
AF: (Adoption of Fintech Payment Services); PE: (Performance Expectancy); EE: (Effort Expectancy); SI: (Social Influence);
FC: (Facilitating Condition); CT: (Consumers’ Trust)

Next, there was a significant positive moderate correlation between

effort expectancy and the adoption of Fintech payment services as r = 0.531,
(p <0.001). Hence, an increase in effort expectancy was associated with a
moderate increase in the adoption of Fintech payment services and vice
versa. For the next variable, there was a significant positive little association
between social influence and the adoption of Fintech payment services as
r = 0.256, p-value less than 0.05 (p = 0.001). Hence, an increase in social
influence was associated with a little increase in the adoption of Fintech
payment services and vice versa.

46
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

However, for the fourth independent variable, which was facilitating

condition, had a significant positive association but not correlated with the
adoption of Fintech payment services as r = 0.149, the p-value is 0.049 (p
<0.05). When there were changes in facilitating conditions, it will have no
impact on the adoption of Fintech payment services. For the last independent
variable, there was a significant positive moderate association between
consumers’ trust and the adoption of Fintech payment services as r = 0.636,
(p <0.001). Hence, an increase in consumers’ trust was associated with a
moderate increase in the adoption of Fintech payment services and vice
versa. The independent variables used in this study did not involve any
multicollinearity problem as the correlation value was less than 0.90. This
result indicated that all variables can be retained as no multicollinearity
issue existed. Therefore, further analyses for testing the research hypotheses
were conducted using multiple regression analysis.

Regression Analysis

Multiple regression analysis of the relationship between five constructs

(performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating
condition and consumers’ trust) with the adoption of Fintech payment
services among employed fresh graduates (Model 1) are shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Model’s Results and Values

Model R Square F-Value P-Value
1 0.474 31.151 0.000

To evaluate the hypotheses for this study, multiple regression analysis

was used to determine whether there was a significant relationship between
the independent variables (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social
influence, facilitating conditions and consumers’ trust) and the adoption of
Fintech payment services among employed fresh graduates.

As documented in Table 6, the R square (r2) value was 0.474 showing

that all the five independent variables selected for this study were able to
explain 47.4% of the variation in the dependent variable (the adoption of
Fintech payment services among employed fresh graduates). Meanwhile,
the remaining 52.6% of the changes were affected by other factors that were
not in this study. The independent variables were sufficient to be classified

47
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

as an explanatory variable given that the p-value was less than 0.1, hence
the result proved that the research model was significant and fit for this
study. Therefore, the multiple linear regression equation for Model 1 was
as follows:

y = α + β1 x1 + β2x2 + β3x3 + β4x4 + β5x5

Where,

y : The Adoption of Fintech Payment Services

x1 : Performance Expectancy
x2 : Effort Expectancy
x3 : Social Influence
x4 : Facilitating Conditions
x5 : Consumers’ Trust

From the model above, the β value for the independent variables
indicated the impact of the independent variables toward the dependent
variable. From this study, performance expectancy was (β = 0.057, p <
0.001), effort expectancy was (β = 0.265, p < 0.001), social influence
was (β = 0.006, p = 0.903), facilitating conditions was (β = -0.019, p =
0.656) and consumers’ trust was (β = 0.365, p < 0.001). On an average, an
increase of one percent of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social
influence and consumers’ trust, the adoption of Fintech payment services
among employed fresh graduates will increase by 5.7%, 26.5%, 0.6% and
36.5%, respectively. However, an increase of one percent of facilitating
conditions will likely decrease the adoption of Fintech payment services
among employed fresh graduates by 1.9%

Table 7: The Coefficients Values of the Model 1

B Std. Error Beta t-statistic Sig
(Constant) 1.566 .319 4.916 .000
Performance Expectancy .057 .054 .063 4.052 .000
Effort Expectancy .265 .062 .277 4.248 .000
Social Influence .006 .048 .007 .122 .903
Facilitating Condition -.019 .043 -.026 -.447 .656
Consumers’ Trust .365 .050 .488 7.352 .000

48
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

As shown in Table 7, all the independent variables, except facilitating

conditions, had a positive correlation with the adoption of Fintech payment
services. However, among these variables, only three of them had a
significant value of below 0.05, which are performance expectancy, effort
expectancy and consumers’ trust, while the others had a significance value
of greater than 0.05. These reflected that out of five variables proposed as
determinant factors, only three variables: performance expectancy, effort
expectancy and consumers’ trust, positively and significantly influenced
the adoption of Fintech payment services among employed fresh graduates.
Consumers’ trust posited the strongest influence (β = 0.365), followed by
(β = 0.265) effort expectancy and performance expectancy (β = 0.057).

Hypotheses Testing

Out of the five hypotheses proposed, three hypotheses were significant

for this study. Hypotheses for this study were analyzed using multiple
regression analysis and a summary result is presented in Table 8 below:

Table 8: Summary of Results

No IV Hypotheses Findings
H1 Performance Performance expectancy significantly There is a significant positive
Expectancy influences the adoption of Fintech relationship between PE and
(PE) payment services among employed the adoption of Fintech payment
fresh graduates. services among employed fresh
graduates.
H2 Effort E ff o r t e x p e c t a n c y s i g n i f i c a n t l y There is a significant positive
Expectancy influences the adoption of Fintech relationship between EE and
(EE) payment services among employed the adoption of Fintech payment
fresh graduates. services among employed fresh
graduates.
H3 Social Social influence significantly influences There is no significant positive
Influence (SI) the adoption of Fintech payment relationship between SI and the
services among employed fresh adoption of Fintech payment
graduates. services among employed fresh
graduates.
H4 Facilitating Facilitating conditions significantly There is no significant negative
Condition influence the adoption of Fintech relationship between FC and the
(FC) payment services among employed adoption of Fintech payment
fresh graduates. services among employed fresh
graduates.
H5 Consumers’ Consumers’ trust significantly There is a significant positive
Trust (CT) influences the adoption of Fintech relationship between CT and
payment services among employed the adoption of Fintech payment
fresh graduates. services among employed fresh
graduates.

49
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

DISCUSSION

The first objective of this study was to examine the influence of performance
expectancy towards the adoption of Fintech payment services among
employed fresh graduates. The results indicated that performance expectancy
exerted a significant influence on the adoption of Fintech payment services
among employed fresh graduates. These findings are supported by Abrahão
et al. (2016), Ramos (2017) and Yahaya and Ahmad (2019), which suggested
that the adoption of Fintech payment services is influenced by the benefits
that can be obtained from using the system.

The second objective of this study was to examine the influence

of effort expectancy towards the adoption of Fintech payment services
among employed fresh graduates. The results of the test showed that effort
expectancy was found to have a significant effect on the adoption of Fintech
payment services among employed fresh graduates. These findings are in
line with a few past studies, including Abdullah et al. (2018), Abrahão et al.
(2016), which suggested less effort to use the system will likely influence
the adoption of the technology. It is because people tend to avoid using a
complicated system to overcome human errors especially while performing
monetary transactions.

The third objective of this study was to examine the influence of social
influence on the adoption of Fintech payment services among employed
fresh graduates. This finding is contrary to the result of past studies such
as Abdullah et al. (2018), Abrahão et al. (2016), Keng-Soon et al. (2019)
and Yahaya and Ahmad (2019). These past studies concluded that social
influence had a significant relationship with the adoption of Fintech. In
contrast, the current study implied that the adoption of Fintech payment
services is not influenced by the surrounding, but it comes from a voluntary
action to adopt a technology. This finding is like several studies such Alalwan
et al. (2017) and Chen et al. (2019), where individuals seemed to be less
interested in the recommendations and attitudes of their reference groups
(i.e., family, friends, colleagues) regarding the adoption of technology. It
is because the adoption of technology is a voluntary action and is often
conducted solo.

50
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

The fourth objective of this study was to examine the influence of

facilitating conditions towards the adoption of Fintech payment services
among employed fresh graduates. The results indicated that facilitating
conditions were insignificant in influencing the adoption of Fintech payment
services among employed fresh graduates. This finding contrasts with past
studies such as Abdullah et al. (2018) and Yahaya and Ahmad (2019).
These past studies concluded that facilitating conditions have a significant
relationship with the adoption of Fintech. This study it had the same results
as Zhou et al. (2019), where other factors related to Fintech payment services
such as customer service and technical knowledge, did not influence the
adoption of Fintech if they had their own smartphone no matter how bad
the facilities which are provided by the system administrator.

The fifth objective of this study was to examine the influence of

consumers’ trust towards the adoption of Fintech payment services among
employed fresh graduates. The result indicated that consumers’ trust had a
significant influence on the adoption of Fintech payment services among
employed fresh graduates. This result is consistent with a few past studies
such as Alhogail (2018) and Stewart and Jürjens (2018). They concluded
that consumers’ trust does influence the adoption of Fintech. Yet, consumers’
trust alone does not guarantee high adoption among users. Good security
will increase consumers’ trust, thus increasing the adoption of Fintech
payment services.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results, out of five hypotheses developed, three hypotheses,

H1, H2 and H5, were supported, while the other two H3 and H4, were
rejected. This indicated that performance expectancy, effort expectancy and
consumers’ trust influence the adoption of Fintech payment services among
employed fresh graduates. The finding in this study showed that social
influence was not significant in influencing the adoption of Fintech payment
services because it is not influenced by the surrounding, but it comes from a
voluntary action to adopt the technology. Meanwhile, facilitating conditions
was also not significant because other facilities related to Fintech payment
services such as customer service and technical knowledge did not influence
the adoption of Fintech if they had their own smartphone no matter how
bad the facilities provided by the system administrator are.

51
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

From the theoretical perspective, this study sheds new light on a new
topic, which has not been studied before. Most past researchers explored
Fintech as a whole and there were very few studies on specific Fintech
services. Therefore, this study attempted to fill the gap in the literature
and contribute to the existing literature about Fintech companies. Besides,
some findings contradict with those in the current literature. Indeed, the
rapid increase of Fintech services has the potential to increase Malaysia’s
economic growth by increasing its efficiency because the emergence of
technology can effectively turn savings into an investment due to the
reduction of human capital and infrastructure.

From a practical perspective, the findings of this study could offer

financial institutions or other related parties a better understanding of
defining the internal or external factors that influence the adoption of
Fintech services among current and potential users. This understanding
will eventually help system administrators to explore what is insufficient
and they will be able to identify other factors that could be implemented
in their current system.

The limitation of this study pertains to sample description. This is

because the largest segment of respondents in the study were young, well-
educated, and had adequate experience with computers and the Internet.
This raises concerns about the applicability of the outcomes to other groups
of the current population that have different characteristics such as age,
income, education level, gender, and experience with technology. Other than
that, this study is limited to a quantitative research method because of time
and cost constraints. Despite that, this quantitative study was successfully
completed, but if a qualitative research or a mixed-mode research was
adopted, the expected outcome will be much wider compared to only a
quantitative approach.

The future research direction includes adding the key moderators of the
UTAUT (e.g., gender, age, experience, and the voluntariness of use) into the
study to identify whether it will or not affect the adoption of Fintech payment
services or any other service related to Fintech. By adding this, it could
generate different perspectives and research results. Besides that, Fintech
covers a broad area which includes crowdfunding, lending, blockchain and
many more. For future research, it is suggested that researchers study another

52
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

context of Fintech such as blockchain to yield a more comprehensive and

better view in understanding of Fintech.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their useful suggestions
in accomplishing this paper. Our utmost gratitude also goes to Faculty
of Accountancy, UiTM Selangor, Kampus Puncak Alam and IRMI of
University Teknologi MARA (UiTM) in providing the financial support
under DDF grant (Geran Dana Dalaman) (600-TNCPI/5/3/DDF (002/2021).

REFERENCES

Abdullah, E. M. E., Rahman, A. A., & Rahim, R. A. (2018). Adoption of

financial technology (Fintech) in mutual fund/ unit trust investment
among Malaysians: Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of
Technology (UTAUT). International Journal of Engineering and
Technology (UAE), 7(2), 110–118.

Abrahão, R. de S., Moriguchi, S. N., & Andrade, D. F. (2016). Intention

of adoption of mobile payment: An analysis in the light of the Unified
Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). RAI Revista
de Administração e Inovação, 13(3), 221–230.

Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Rana, N. P. (2017). Factors influencing

adoption of mobile banking by Jordanian bank customers: Extending
UTAUT2 with trust. International Journal of Information Management,
37(3), 99–110.

Alhogail, A. (2018). Improving IoT technology adoption through improving

consumer trust. Technologies, 6(3), 64.

Arner, D. W., Barberis, J., & Buckley, R. P. (2015). The evolution of Fintech:
A new post-crisis paradigm. Georgetown Journal of International Law,
47, 1271-1319.

53
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

Chen, W. C., Chen, C. W., & Chen, W. K. (2019). Drivers of mobile

payment acceptance in China: An empirical investigation. Information
(Switzerland), 10(12), 1–20.

Chong, T.-P., William Choo, K.-S., Yip, Y.-S., Chan, P.-Y., Julian Teh, H.-
L., & Ng, S.-S. (2019). An adoption of Fintech service in Malaysia.
Southeast Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and
Law, 18(5), 73–92.

Chuang, L. M., Liu, C. C., & Kao, H. K. (2016). The adoption of fintech
service: TAM perspective. International Journal of Management and
Administrative Sciences, 3(7), 1-15.

Dang, Y. M., Zhang, Y. G., & Morgan, J. (2017). Integrating switching

costs to information systems adoption: An empirical study on learning
management systems. Information Systems Frontiers, 19(3), 625–644.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user

acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

Dorfleitner, G., Hornuf, L., Schmitt, M., & Weber, M. (2017). International
position of the German FinTech market. In FinTech in Germany (pp.
47-54). Springer, Cham.

Ernst & Young. (2016). German FinTech landscape: Opportunity for Rhein-
Main-Neckar.

Faridi, O. (2020). Retrieved from https://www.crowdfundinsider.co

m/2020/08/165717-Fintech-investments-in-asia-pacific-surged-9-1-
to-1-4-billion-during-q2-2020-as-investors-shift-focus-from-india-to-
australia-other-regions-report/

Fintech News Malaysia. (2020, August 20). Fintech News Malaysia.

Retrieved from https://Fintechnews.my/24573/various/bnm-director-
suhaimi-ali-explains-Fintech-regulation-in-malaysia.

Fong, V. (2020). Malaysia to spend RM 1.2 billion promoting e-wallets in

2020. Fintech News Malaysia. Retrieved from https://fintechnews.m
y/23971/e-wallets-malaysia/e-wallet-malaysia-pejana
54
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

Gao, S., & Yang, Y. (2014). The role of trust towards the adoption of mobile
services in China: An empirical study. IFIP Advances in Information
and Communication Technology, 445, 46–57.

Gefen, D., & Straub, D. (2003). Managing user trust in B2C e-services.
e-Service, 2(2), 7-24.

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). Using SPSS for Windows step by step:
A simple guide and reference (4th ed.). London: Pearson Education.

Grabner-Krauter, S., & Faullant, R. (2008). Consumer acceptance of internet

banking: The influence of internet trust. International Journal of Bank
Marketing, 26(7), 483-504.

Gupta, S., & Xu, H. (2010). Examining the relative influence of risk and
control on intention to adopt risky technologies. Journal of Technology
Management & Innovation, 5(4), 22-37.

Jin, C. C., Seong, L. C., & Khin, A. A. (2019). Factors affecting the consumer
acceptance towards Fintech products and services in Malaysia.
International Journal of Asian Social Science, 9(1), 59–65.

Joshua, A. J., & Koshy, M. P. (2011). Usage patterns of electronic banking

services by urban educated customers: Glimpses from India. Journal
of Internet Banking and Commerce, 16(1), 1-12.

Keng-Soon, C., Choo Yen-San, W., Pui-Yee, Y., Hong-Leong, C., & Teh
Shwu-Shing, J. (2019). An adoption of Fintech service in Malaysia.
Southeast Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and
Law, 18(5), 73–92.

Khraim, H. S., Al Shoubaki, Y. E., & Khraim, A. S. (2011). Factors

affecting Jordanian consumers’ adoption of mobile banking services.
International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(20), 96-105.

Kim, Y., Choi, J., Park, Y. J., & Yeon, J. (2016). The adoption of mobile
payment services for “Fintech”. International Journal of Applied
Engineering Research, 11(2), 1058-1061.

55
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

Kranz, M., Murmann, L., & Michahelles, F. (2013). Research in the large:
Challenges for large-scale mobile application research - A case study
about NFC adoption using gamification via an app store. International
Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction (IJMHCI), 5(1), 45-61.

Marakarkandy, B., Yajnik, N., & Dasgupta, C. (2017). Enabling internet

banking adoption: An empirical examination with an augmented
technology acceptance model (TAM). Journal of Enterprise Information
Management, 30(2), 263-294.

Martins, C., Oliveira, T., & Popovič, A. (2014). Understanding the Internet
banking adoption: A unified theory of acceptance and use of technology
and perceived risk application. International Journal of Information
Management, 34(1), 1-13.

Mathews, M. S. (2020). Trust fresh graduates to deliver. New Straits Times.

Retrieved from https://www.nst.com.my/opinion/letters/2020/02/568
669/trust-fresh-graduates-deliver

Ministry of Education. (2019). Statistik Pendidikan Tinggi 2018. Statistik

Pendidikan Tinggi, 161–171.

Mustapha, M., & Siaw, L. (2012). Whistle blowing: Perceptions of future

accountants. International Proceedings of Economics Development
and Research, 38, 135–139.

Network Readiness Index. (2019). Retrieved from https://

networkreadinessindex.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/The-Network-
Readiness-Index-2019-New-version-March-2020.pdf.

Pallant, J. (2011). A step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS. Allen

and Unwin.

Patel, K. J., & Patel, H. J. (2018). Adoption of internet banking services

in Gujarat: An extension of TAM with perceived security and social
influence. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 36(1), 147-169.

56
 Technology Acceptance of Financial Technology (Fintech)

PwC. (2016). Catching the Fintech wave. Price Waterhouse Coopers

Journal. Retrieved from https://www.pwc.com/my/en/assets/publicat
ions/2016-pwc-aicb-catching-the-Fintech-wave.pdf.

Rabin, K. (2020). Malaysia is the latest country to hop on the fintech trend.
Finextra. Retrieved from https://www.finextra.com/blogposting/ 18505/
malaysia-is-the-latest-country-to-hop-on-the-fintech-trend

Ramos, F. A. B. (2017). Accessing the determinants of behavioral intention

to adopt fintech services among the millennial generation (Doctoral
dissertation).

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. J. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill
building approach (7th ed.). Wiley PLUS Learning Space Card. Wiley.

Shin, D. H. (2010). Ubiquitous computing acceptance model: End user

concern about security, privacy, and risk. International Journal of
Mobile Communications, 8(2), 169–186.

Slade, E. L., Dwivedi, Y. K., Piercy, N. C., & Williams, M. D. (2015).

Modeling consumers’ adoption intentions of remote mobile payments
in the United Kingdom: Extending UTAUT with innovativeness, risk,
and trust. Psychology and Marketing, 32(8), 860–873.

Stewart, H., & Jürjens, J. (2018). Data security and consumer trust in
Fintech innovation in Germany. Information and Computer Security,
26(1), 109–128.

Szakiel, P. (2018). What is fintech: A beginner’s guide to financial technology

in 2019. Retrieved at: https://learn.g2.com/Fintech

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User
acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS
Quarterly, 425-478.

Yahaya, M. H., & Ahmad, K. (2019). Factors affecting the acceptance

of financial technology among asnaf for the distribution of zakat in
Selangor - A study using UTAUT. Journal of Islamic Finance, 8, 35–46.

57
Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, Volume 16 Issue 2

Yu, C. S. (2012). Factors affecting individuals to adopt mobile banking:

Empirical evidence from the UTAUT model. Journal of Electronic
Commerce Research, 13(2), 104-121.

Zhou, L. L., Owusu-Marfo, J., Asante Antwi, H., Antwi, M. O., Kachie, A.
D. T., & Ampon-Wireko, S. (2019). Assessment of the social influence
and facilitating conditions that support nurses’ adoption of hospital
electronic information management systems (HEIMS) in Ghana using
the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)
model. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 19(1), 230.

Zhou, T., Lu, Y., & Wang, B. (2010). Integrating TTF and UTAUT to explain
mobile banking user adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4),
760–767.

58