Ryan Clifford L. Perez.

HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-… 3

Perception of e-wallets as the mode of payment for online enrollment

in Marinduque State College
Ryan Clifford L. Perez1*
1
Institute of Information Systems and Technology, Marinduque State College, Marinduque, Philippines
*
Corresponding author: ryancliffordperez@gmail.com

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

DOI:10.46223/HCMCOUJS. The advancement of finance and technology in what is

econ.en. commonly referred to as Fintech has introduced an opportunity for
many business models in the new normal which provides ease of
conducting money related transactions amongst consumers,
retailers, suppliers and society as a whole. One of the most
Received: May 05th, 2022
commonly used FinTech is the electronic wallets (e-wallets); a
Revised: June 02nd, 2022 cashless electronic payment system. E-wallets provide the user the
th
Accepted: June 08 , 2022 services and access to accomplish financial transactions and digital
payments quickly that only require the application of smartphones
and Internet connectivity. However, there are many perceptions
about the application of e-wallets, particularly in e-money-related
transactions such as in school enrolment, and would still prefer the
use of money in physical form. Therefore, this paper aims to analyze
the perceptions among the students from Marinduque State College
that contributes to the use of e-wallet as the mode of payment for
school enrolment and transactions through the Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM) using Perceived Ease of Use (PEU),
Perceived Usefulness (PU) Perceived Convenience (PC),
Willingness (W) and Behavioral Intention (BI) as the main variables.
To reach the objective, a sample size of at least 267 respondents was
identified. The questionnares was sent to 600 students students to
accommodate possible non-response which are students from the
Institute of Information Systems and Technology (IIST) Marinduque
State College, and a quantitative approach was applied to examine
and test the hypothesis. The study finding shows that Perceived
Keywords: Usefulness (PU) and Willingness (W) have a positive significant
e-wallets; fintech; Marinduque effect on the Behavioral Intention (BI) to use an e-wallet as the mode
State College; Technology of payment. In contrast, Perceived Convenience (PC) and Perceived
Acceptance Model Ease of Use (PEU) have no positive significant effect on the
Behavioral Intention (BI) to use an e-wallet.

1. Introduction
In today’s era of digital information, the increasing high-tech innovations and the extensive
use of technology have changed the way people perform banking and financial transactions
worldwide (Romānova & Kudinska, 2017). The digitalization opportunity and challenges open
new doors for technological problems with innovative solutions.
In the financial services sector, any technological advancement that leads to the
development of the procedure, efficiency of the financial system, and transactions according to its
business situation and requirements are identified as Financial Technology or generally known as
FinTech. These technology-based financial innovation services are characterized by the
integration of Internet technologies, Artificial Intelligence (AI), social media services, and big data
(Suryono, Budi, & Purwandari, 2020).
4 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-…

Based on the above facts, society should understand and consider more what the true
potential of Fintech is for financial transactions. It can be a valuable perspective and more
significantly for individuals who are directly impacted by this technological innovation.
1.1. Financial technology (FinTech)
Apart from the conventional financial and banking processes, which are managed
following strict guidelines and standards, FinTech has introduced a new technological trend that
provides easy, secure, and quick financial transactions (Vučinić, 2020). The rapid growth of
Fintech made banks and businesses invest and rethink the financial services and their distribution
networks, especially in the business-to-consumer type models. The technological advancements
in FinTech include e-funding, e-trading, e-insurance cryptocurrencies, and e-payment systems
such as the use of electronic wallets (e-wallets); the non-cash payment system using smartphones
or any electronic devices. (Rachmawati, Witanto, Nugroho, & Manaf, 2019; Suryono et al., 2020).
1.2. Electronic wallet (e-wallet)
Smartphones play a significant role in the daily life of today’s society especially in the
young adult in the 21st century, they are commonly observed and described as tech-enthusiast for
these generations were born in the era of smartphone technology (Karim, Haque, Ulfy, Hossain,
& Anis, 2020). The innovations and capabilities of mobile devices have provided mobile users the
ability to accomplish money transactions or payments by using an e-wallet. An e-wallet is a virtual
or cashless service often used as a substitute for the use of physical cash or currency in any given
business or financial transaction (Chauhan & Shingari, 2017; Manikandan & Jayakodi, 2017). The
application and use of e-wallets have led to time-saving transactions and opened the opportunity
for a safe, effective, and futuristic method of money transactions. Kanimozhi and Kamatchi (2017)
identified three (3) categories of e-wallets, all of which have several types of financial transaction
services offered:
Open e-wallets: these are e-wallets that can be used for multiple services i.e., buying goods
and services, transferring funds, and withdrawing from banks or ATMs.
Semi-closed e-wallets: most popular amongst e-commerce companies typically distributed
by telecommunication companies.
Closed e-wallets: these are in high demand by merchants because it only allows the
consumer to buy goods and services from the listed or specific merchants.
2. Literature review and research gap
E-wallets grew widespread an attraction due to their greater benefits compared to other
payment modes. Patil, Belhekar, Burkul, Sambare, and Reddy (2019) concluded that e-wallets
offer several types of financial transaction services and the use of e-wallets provided the freedom
to shop, pay, and perform money transactions anywhere at any given time.
Financial transactions that usually are time-consuming can now be accomplished in an
instant. Despite the growing number of individuals that uses e-wallet systems, the adoption rate of
e-wallet technologies for financial transactions are still observed and the perceptions that affect
the use of e-wallet to expand the market and money transactions.
2.1. Social influence and behavioral intention
Social influence refers to the desire of adopting e-wallets from potential influencers and
other environmental factors. According to the recent study by Yang, Mamun, Mohiuddin, che
Nawi, and Zainol (2021), the potential influences for the behavioral intention to use e-wallets are
family members, friends, colleagues, and neighbors. Thus, making the environmental factors
encourages e-wallet individuals to purchase a product without the need for physical cash. Social
influence affected the mindsets of an individual to use innovative technology services.
 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-… 5

Abdullah, Redzuan, and Daud (2020) used descriptive and inferential statistics to quantify
the acceptance of e-wallets for purchase intentions using Performance expectancy, Social
Influence, Facilitating Conditions, and Trust as the variables. The study reveals that Performance
expectancy, Social Influence, facilitating conditions, and Trust are the most influential significant
factor for the acceptance of e-wallets.
Another study by Tenk, Yew, and Heang (2020) examines the adoption and behavioral
intention (BI) of using e-wallets from Malaysian smartphone users. Using the Unified Theory of
Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model from examining 210 respondents were
collected through an online survey. The result shows that three-quarters of Malaysian have tried
using an e-wallet despite that it is still not a very common payment option. But the result reveals
that expectations, effort, and social influence have a positive impact on the adoption and use of e-
wallets while perceived risk and cost have no significant influence.
The study also suggests further study about the user’s view of the difficulty in the use and
adoption of e-wallets. Xian, Yien, Ai, Yi, and Ping (2018) also reveals from the study that
convenience, social influence, and the speed of transaction have positive significance towards the
adoption and behavioral intention of using e-wallet among undergraduate students while security
has no significant impact. To further examine the intention to use an e-wallet, the study suggests
expanding the study to other generations, and the age of the target respondent should be widened
in the future study.
2.2. E-wallets’ ease of use
Yang et al. (2021) identify perceived ease of use as the major determinant of user attitude
and behavioral intention to accept and use an e-wallet. It was supported that perceived ease of use
is one of the most important variables for an individual to adopt and use an e-wallet for purchase
intentions and other financial transactions.
The study of Pertiwi, Suprapto, and Pratama (2020) aimed to investigate the perceived
usage of Generations Y with birth years from 1980 to 2000 on the adoption of e-wallets based on
the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) which is described as a reliable model to analyze the
acceptance of using new technology. The result reveals that Perceived Usefulness (PU) and
Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) have a positive impact on Behavioral Intention (BI) to use an e-
wallet, and the high Behavioral Intention (BI) has a positive impact on the actual use of an e-
wallet. The study also suggests using the same model and methodology to conduct a study on the
Generation-Z sample population.
Karim et al. (2020) conducted a study on Malaysian young adults to examine the
influencing factors for adopting and using e-wallets using the Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM). A total of 220 data were collected from the e-wallet users. The study concluded that e-
wallet Perceived Usefulness (PU), Perceive Ease of Use (PEU), privacy, and security have a
positive impact and significant relationship with Behavioral Intention (BI) to use and adopt e-
wallets. The study also suggests including more variables to examine usage intention such as
Willingness (W), trust, cost, and reliability using the same model.
Aransyah, Roy, and Aprianti (2020) study reviewed the resistance to the adoption and use
of e-wallets and suggested a baseline for future e-wallet services to accommodate more users’
needs and to increase e-wallet utilization. The target population from the study of Adharsh,
Harikrishnan, Prasad, and Venugopal (2018) examines the intention to use and adoption of e-
wallets among youth. One-third of the target population uses an e-wallet at least once a month due
to its accessibility, Perceived Ease of Use (PEU), and security during payment. From the literature
cited, a hypothesis has been suggested that:
H1: Perceived ease of use will have a positive influence on the behavioral intention to use
an e-wallet
6 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-…

2.3. The usefulness of using e-wallets

Perceived usefulness is the subjective probability that technologies can improve the way
users complete their goals. In the context of the research, perceived usefulness (PU) will increase
the user’s desire to use e-wallet systems. According to the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM),
the Perceived Usefulness (PU) is the extent to which an individual believes that using a particular
system will increase the effectiveness, performance, and work output (Safroni, Hurriyati, &
Dirgantari, 2019).
Various studies have shown that Perceived Usefulness (PU) has a positive influence on the
Behavioral Intention (BI) to use e-wallet systems to accomplish payment transactions. Kabir, Saidin,
and Ahmi (2017) conducted an investigation using Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and
Perceived Usefulness (PU) as one of the key variables; and the study found out that the Perceived
Usefulness (PU) of using an e-wallet can have a positive influence in the Behavioral Intention (BI)
of using an e-wallet. Based on the literature readings, a hypothesis has been suggested:
H2: Perceived usefulness has a positive significant effect on the behavioral intention to use
an e-wallet
2.4. The convenience of using e-wallets
Convenience can be considered as the ease or comfort to use technology as well as the
attainment of the advantages through portability and immediate accessibility without much effort
from the users (Nizam, Hwang, & Valaei, 2018). Perceived Convenience (PC) and Willingness
(W) to adopt e-wallets play a significant role in an individual’s decision to adopt an e-wallet as the
mode of payment. From the target population of undergraduate students, the study of Nizam et al.
(2018) revealed that Perceived Convenience (PC), cost-saving, Willingness (W), and security have
a positive influence on consumer purchase behavior.
A similar study from Xian et al. (2018) aimed to discover the important factors influencing
consumer purchase decisions using e-wallets. The survey questionnaire was distributed to 230
respondents; the result of the study indicates that Perceived Convenience (PC), social influence,
and speed of transaction have positive significance towards the use and adoption of e-wallets
among undergraduate students. Interestingly, security has no significant impact. Syifa and Tohang
(2020) also concluded that e-wallet provides convenience for the users to make a purchase thus
providing a big impact on the Behavioral Intention (BI) and use and adopt e-wallet as the mode of
payment. From the literature, two (2) hypotheses have been suggested:
H3: Perceived Convenience has a positive significant effect on the behavioral intention to
use an e-wallet
H4: Willingness has a positive significant effect on the behavioral intention to use an e-
wallet
2.5. Research gap and opportunity
Study on Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) has been often used to describe influences
that contribute to the adoption of modern technologies such as e-wallets. A conclusion from the
study by Adharsh et al. (2018), identified major factors that influence the behavioral intention of
users to adopt e-wallets; this includes, ease of use, usefulness, convenience, and willingness.
In a study of Kustono, Nanggala, and Mas’ud (2020), aimed to determine the factors that
influence the behavioral intention of using e-wallets amongst college students from Indonesia
using Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the finding shows evidence that perceived ease of
use directly influences perceived usefulness, and perceived usefulness of using e-wallets have a
positive influence in the behavioral intention of adopting e-wallets. By applying TAM, Kustono
et al. (2020) suggested that improving ease of use is more critical in improving the quality of e-
wallet applications for college students.
 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-… 7

Similar study from Kowang et al. (2020) that applied Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM) for e-wallets also aimed to identify important factors that influences the adoption of e-
wallets amongst undergraduates from public universities in Malaysia. That result reveals that
perceived ease of use is viewed by the undergraduate students as more important factor that
influence the use of e-wallets.
Based from the related studies above, Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) can provide
insights in the perception of students in adopting e-wallets which can include for conducting
school-related transactions such as payment for enrolments and other transactions. Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM) can be applied in Marinduque State College to identify the pereption
of students about adopting e-wallets services.
2.6. Study objectives
This paper aims to determine the factors that influence the perception of an e-wallet as a
mode of payment for school enrolment in Marinduque State College through the Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM) using Perceived Ease of Use (PEU), Perceived Usefulness (PU),
Perceived Convenience (PC), Willingness (W) and Behavioral Intention (BI) as the main variables
(Adharsh et al., 2018).
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is a reliable model for describing approval or
perception in the use of new technology (Pertiwi et al., 2020). To reach the objective, a sample
size of 300 respondents was identified which are students from the Institute of Information
Systems and Technology (IIST) Marinduque State College; and a quantitative approach was
applied to examine and test the hypothesis. Descriptive statistics were used to present the
distribution of respondents according to various demographic variables and a narrative of the
research variable based on the respondent’s answers (Purwanto, Hartini, & Premananto, 2018).
2.7. Conceptual framework of the study
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) has been an important field of sudy for many years
in the Information Systems community to indentify users acceptance of technology (Chuttur,
2009). Suggest by Davis (1985), it examines the mediating role of users’ perception about a
systems characteristic and the probability of system to be used. There are several studies that have
applied Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to examine the perception and influencing factors
to adopt and use e-wallets among respondents (i.e., Karim et al., 2020; Kowang et al., 2020;
Kustono et al., 2020; Pertiwi et al., 2020). From the related studies, Figure 1 shows the proposed
conceptual model for the study.

Perceived ease
of use H1

Perceived H2
usefulness Behavioral e-wallets as a
Intention to use mode of
an e-wallet payment.
H3
Perceived
Convenience
H4

Willingness

Figure 1. Modified conceptual framework adopted from Karim et al. (2020)

Guided by the proposed conceptual framework, the following hypothesis has been tested:
H1: Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) will have a positive influence on the Behavioral
Intention (BI) to use e-wallets
H2: Perceived Usefulness (PU) will have a positive significant effect on the behavioral
8 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-…

intention to use e-wallets

H3: Perceived Convenience (PC) will have a positive significant effect on the behavioral
intention (BI) to use e-wallets
H4: Willingness (W) will have a positive significant effect on the Behavioral Intention (BI)
to use e-wallets
3. Research methodology
The research model includes five constructs, including Perceived Ease of Use (PEU),
Perceived Usefulness (PU), Perceived Convenience (PC), Willingness (W), And Behavioral
Intention (BI) to use e-wallets. The survey analysis will be based on Technology Acceptance
Model (TAM) adopted from the study of Karim et al. (2020). All items will be measured using a
five-point Likert scale (i.e., 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly Agree) to interpret the statement
of agreement.
3.1. Data collection method
All the items in the questionnaire were designed using English with Tagalog Translation
and were distributed online (i.e., sending Google Form links through a personal message on
Messenger or Google Classroom). The questionnaires will be further modified to improve clarity
and comprehensively based on the comment and feedback received from the respondents. The
research instrument will be distributed to the students of the Institute of Information Systems and
Technology (i.e., through Facebook and Google Classrooms) in no particular order.
3.2. Sample size and statistical method
From the identified population of 873 students from the Institute of Information Systems
and Technology (IIST), the author believes that students with technology background can have a
deeper understanding of how a particular technology works and can promote technology to other
students with non-technology background. In addition, IIST represents the second biggest
population of students at the Marindquue State College.
Slovin’s formula was used to identify the target samples (sample size = N/(1+Ne2), e =
0.05), a sample size of at least 267 was computed. The questionnaire will be sent to at least 600
students to accommodate possible non-response. The data gathered was used for statistical and
descriptive analysis, reliability, consistency, and convergent validity test.
4. Results and discussion
The questionnaires were deployed using Google Forms and were sent to at least 600
students; the total respondents collected were 592 students, with a total valid sample of 561
respondents used this research.
4.1. Demographic characteristics
 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-… 9

No. of Respondents per Year Level

236

No. of Respondents
149
121
72

1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year

Year Level

Figure 2. The number of respondents per year level

Figure 2 shows the year levels of the respondents in the study. 41% are from the 1st-year
level indicating the majority of the samples. 27% are from the 2nd year level the second largest of
the respondents. 20% are 4th-year senior students and 12% represent the 3rd-year students from a
total of 561 respondents.

e-wallets' Verification Status

Verified e-wallets
35%
None verified e-wallets

65%

Figure 3. Verified and none verified e-wallets

Figure 3 shows the number of verified e-wallets that the respondents currently have on
their mobile devices. 65% show or the majority of the respondents have verified e-wallets; while
35% have unverified e-wallets. Having an unverified e-wallet can limit the use of e-wallet services.
The majority of the e-wallets in the market require a valid ID for verification; while a student’s ID
is currently not accepted to verify the e-wallets; thus, could possibly signify the chart’s result.

Internet Connectivity of the Respondents

Fair 62.9

Good 26.7

Poor 4.3

Excellent 1.9

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Figure 2. Internet connectivity of the respondents

Legend: Excellent = Stable 4G to 5G Signal; Good: 4G signal at most; Fair: 4G but sometimes drops to 3G signal);
Poor to Unstable: (3G to no internet connection)
Figure 4 shows the result in terms of the strength of Internet connectivity among the
10 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-…

respondents. 62.9% of the respondents have fair Internet connectivity; while the majority of the
respondents have a 4G Internet signal which is fairly acceptable but sometimes the signal strength
drops to the slower 3G signal. 26.7% of the respondents have good and stable 4G Internet
connectivity, and only 1.9% of the respondents have excellent Internet connectivity. The
remaining respondents; have unstable to no Internet connectivity.
Frequently used e-wallet Services

Purchase Mobile Load 307

Send and Receive Money 207

Shop Online 118

Pay Bills 72

Figure 3. Frequently use of e-wallets services

Figure 5 shows the result of the most frequently used e-wallet services. While e-wallets
offer various services such as shopping online and paying bills and it varies among different e-
wallet service providers, purchasing mobile credits/load is the most frequently used e-wallet
service among the respondents; while sending and receiving e-money is the second most frequently
used e-wallet services.

Preferred e-wallet Service Provider

Gcash 451

Paymaya 52

Paypal 43

Coins.ph 27

Lazada Wallet 23

0 100 200 300 400 500

Figure 4. E-wallet service provider of the respondents

Although most of the respondents have multiple responses in terms of preferred e-wallet
service providers, Figure 6 shows that Gcash e-wallet is the most preferred e-wallet service
provider of the respondents which have a total of 451 responses. While only 52 are using Paymaya
e-wallet as the second most preferred e-wallet service provider. 43 respondents are using Paypal,
and 27 respondents answered coins.ph wallet and 23 are using Lazada e-wallet.

Would consider the use of e-wallet services

Yes
42% 47% No
Maybe

11%

Figure 5. Respondents who would consider using e-wallets

 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-… 11

Figure 7 show the result of respondents in terms of considering the use of e-wallet for
school-related fees and transactions. 47% or the majority of the respondents would consider using
their e-wallets for school-related transactions; while 42% of the respondents will perhaps or
possibly consider; in contrast, only 11% of the respondents will not consider using their e-wallets
for school-related transactions.
4.2. Model evaluation
Internal consistency reliability is tested using two methods, which are Cronbach’s Alpha
and Composite Reliability. It is suggested that the result of both tests must be higher than 0.7
(Chin, 1998). The reliability test used a Cronbach Alpha value of greater than 0.70. Based on the
calculations performed, the reliability test results of this study can be shown in Table 1.
On the result of the Cronbach’s Alpha, as shown in Table 1, all the values were in ranged
between 0.7 and 0.9. It can be interpreted that these variables have excellent reliability and fulfilled
the requirement of the Cronbach’s Alpha. Willingness (W) is the variable with the highest
Cronbach’s Alpha value of 0.97 followed by the Perceived Usefulness (PU) with the Cronbach’s
Alpha value of 0.96; followed by Behavioral Intention (BI) with the Cronbach’s Alpha value of
0.95; while Perceived Convenience (PC) and Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) have an excellent level
of reliability as well.
Results reveal that the majority or 44% of the respondents experience the most difficulty
in locating the Registrar’s office, followed by the Cashier’s Office 33% and the library 15%. In
terms of the reasons for the difficulty in locating these buildings, the majority 39% of the
respondents state that it is simply because they are unaware of the buildings’ whereabouts inside
the University. In response to this, the majority, or 47% of the respondents seek the assistance of
university guards.
Table 1
Result of Cronbach’s Alpha test
Variables Cronbach’s Alpha (>0.70) Interpretation
Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) 0.93 Excellent
Perceived Usefulness (PU) 0.96 Excellent
Perceived Convenience (PC) 0.94 Excellent
Willingness (W) 0.97 Excellent
Behavioral Intention (BI) 0.95 Excellent

The result of Composite Reliability in table 2.0, has shown all of the variables were in the
accepted range of 0.7 and above indicating a reliable result (Chin, 1998). The result of Composite
Reliability in the variable Willingness (W) shows the highest with 0.875. This indicates that the
respondent’s willingness to use an e-wallet is highly reliable. Followed by the Perceived Ease of
Use (PEU) with the Composite Reliability value of 0.874. Behavioral Intention (BI) went as the
third-highest Composite Reliability value of 0.874. Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Perceived
Convenience have the same Composite value of 0.830 which is still above the accepted Composite
Reliability of greater than 0.70.
Based on the result of Composite Reliability, all the values were above 0.70 which fulfills
the suggested value standard (Chin, 1998). This result indicates that these variables are adequate
internal consistency and are able to measure.
12 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-…

Table 2
Result of composite reliability test
Variables Composite Reliability (> 0.70) Interpretation
Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) 0.874 Reliable
Perceived Usefulness (PU) 0.830 Reliable
Perceived Convenience (PC) 0.830 Reliable
Willingness (W) 0.875 Reliable
Behavioral Intention (BI) 0.827 Reliable

The result of the Average Variance Extract is shown in Table 3, it is suggested (Hair, Halle,
Terry-Humen, Lavelle, & Calkins, 2006) that the resulting value must be above 0.50 to be valid.
The result shows that Willingness (W) has the highest Average Variance Extract (AVE) value of
0.636 followed by Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) as the second-highest with the EVA value of
0.635. Perceived Convenience (PC) has the lowest EVA value of 0.550. It can be observed in
Table 3 that all the variable results indicated have AVE values that had meet the standard of the
convergent validity.
Therefore, these values can be concluded as there is sufficient convergent validity.
Table 3
Result of Average Variance Extract Test
Variables Average Variance Extracted ( > 0.50) Interpretation
Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) 0.635 Valid
Perceived Usefulness (PU) 0.551 Valid
Perceived Convenience (PC) 0.550 Valid
Willingness (W) 0.636 Valid
Behavioral Intention (BI) 0.544 Valid

4.3. Hypothesis testing and discussion of the results

Hypotheses are tested by performing significance testing. Significance testing allows the
researcher to understand the relationship between variables.
Table 4
Hypothesis testing result
Hypothesis Path t-Stats p-Value Conclusion
H1: Perceived ease of use will have a positive
Not
influence on the behavioral intention to use an e- PEU → BI 1.6820 0.931
Significant
wallet
H2: Perceived usefulness will have a positive
significant effect on the behavioral intention to use PU → BI 4.0180 0.00007 Significant
an e-wallet
H3: Perceived Convenience will have a positive
Not
significant effect on the behavioral intention to use PC → BI -0.0468 0.963
Significant
an e-wallet
H4: Willingness will have a positive significant
W → BI 4.2990 0.00002 Significant
effect on the behavioral intention to use an e-wallet
 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-… 13

Perceived Ease of Use (PEU)

Based on the result shown in Table 4, hypothesis 1: Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) has a p-
value of 0.931 signifying that Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) has no positive influence on the
Behavioral Intention (BI) of using e-Wallet as the mode of payment.
The ease of use of using an e-wallet in many of its services doesn’t necessarily provide the
respondents the motivation to use an e-wallet in paying their school-related fees. This can be
observed from Figure 3 that 64.9% of respondents’ e-wallet is not verified due to the fact that most
e-wallet services are not accepting student ID for the e-wallet verification process to enable the
usage of its full services.
If the process of using the e-wallet features is delicate, it will have an impact on reducing
the use of the e-wallets. Benefits and Ease of use (Alaeddin, Altounjy, Zainudin, & Kamarudin,
2018) are shown by the ease of accomplishing transactions, the ease of installing, using the
application, and verification of the e-wallet account.
Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) is one of the most important variables for the Behavioral
Intentions (BI) to adopt e-wallets. If the process of verifying an e-wallet account will improve, it
will increase the perceived ease of use and increase the chance of adopting the application.
Perceived Convenience (PC)
In addition, surprisingly the result of hypothesis 3: Perceived Convenience (PC) in Table
4 has a p-value of 0.963 which is much higher than the result of hypothesis 1, signifying that the
convenience of using an e-wallet has no positive influence on the Behavioral Intention (BI) of
using e-wallet for the respondents as the mode of payment.
The convenience of having an e-wallet on mobile devices and having access to its services
doesn’t provide any positive influence on the motivation to use e-wallet services as the mode of
payment among respondents. This can be observed from Figure 4 where the majority of the
respondents have fairly stable Internet connectivity thus affecting the convenience of using e-
wallet services.
Perceived Usefulness (PU)
However, hypothesis 2: Perceived Usefulness (PU) in Table 4 has a p-value result of
0.00007 which can be interpreted as nearly zero (0).
The p-value is the probability of rejecting or failing to reject the null hypothesis. P-value
stands for probability value that measures the strength of evidence. The traditional level of
significance of p-value is, p < 0.05. (Thiese, Ronna, & Ott, 2016) A p-value less than 0.05 can be
interpreted as statistically significant that indicates strong evidence against the null hypothesis as
there is less than 5% probability the null is correct.
This signifies that the usefulness of e-wallet in terms of its services has a positive influence
on the Behavioral Intention (BI) of using e-wallet as the mode of payment. This can be observed
in Figure 5 showing majority of the respondents uses e-wallet for purchasing prepared loads and
sending and receiving money without the requirement of much effort.
These results agree with the research conducted by (Kim, Mirusmonov, & Lee, 2010;
Weng, Yang, Ho, & Su, 2018). The use of e-wallets and their services provides the user the benefits
in conducting transactions thus rendering its usefulness; influencing efficiency and time-saving in
the form of reducing the transaction time (Seetharaman, Kumar, Palaniappan, & Weber, 2017). In
addition, one of the many benefits for the users is in form of promos given by the e-wallet service
providers, so the higher perceived usefulness (Liébana-Cabanillas, Ramos de Luna, & Montoro
Ríos, 2017), the higher it influences in terms of Behavioral Intention (BI) of using e-wallets as a
mode of payment (Yan & Pan, 2014).
14 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-…

Willingness (W)
In addition, hypothesis 4: Willingness (W) in Table 4 has a p-value of 0.00002 which can
also be interpreted as nearly zero (0). As stated by Thiese et al. (2016), a p-value less than 0.05
can be interpreted as statistically significant which supports strong evidence against the null
hypothesis.
This also signifies that the respondent’s willingness to adopt e-wallet services has a
positive influence on the Behavioral Intention (BI) of using an e-wallet as the mode of payment.
In Figure 7, 47.2% or the majority of the respondents would consider using an e-wallet
service for school-related transactions. This also agrees with the result of Pertiwi et al. (2020)
where Perceived Usefulness (PU) of using e-wallet by the respondents when using e-wallet as the
mode of payments for many financial transactions can also influence the willingness, thus affecting
the Behavioral Intention (BI) to adopt e-wallet services.
5. Future research
This research was conducted to examine the perceptions of students on the use of e-wallets
for school-related transactions such as in the enrollment process. The statistical test results in the
study show that Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Willingness (W) to adopt e-wallets for school-
related transactions have a positive influence on the Behavioral Intention (BI) of using e-wallets
as the mode of payment. With the use of e-wallets, transactions for individuals both online and
offline can now be done without the need to move, thus reducing the processing time (Syifa &
Tohang, 2020).
However, since the respondents are undergraduate students; major e-wallet service
provider in the Philippines currently does not accept students’ ID to verify an e-wallet account,
thus affecting the verification process of e-wallets to be completed. Currently, e-wallets in the
Philippines can only accept government issued ID such as Driver’s License, Passport, PhilHealth
Card, Philippine Postal ID, PRC ID, SSS ID, UMID and Voter’s ID that are mostly can only be
issued to users that are employed, which students are currently cannot have access to. As an effect,
this limits the services that the students can employ with the use of e-wallets.
Slow Internet service connection can also affect the Perceived Convenience (PC) of e-
wallets use since e-wallet requires a decent Internet connection to be used properly. Internet
connectivity in the province of Marinduque is still an issue for the adoption of e-wallets, thus
Marinduque State College should consider, though there are certain parts of Marinduque that has
stable Internet connectivity, this can be considered for further study and analysis for future
researchers.
Though there are barriers in the adoption of e-wallets services in Marinduque State
College. It is still suggested to consider the adoption of e-wallets services for Marinduque State
College for school-related transactions, such as enrollments and other forms of services.
For future research, it is also suggested to include more variables to examine the Behavioral
Intention (BI) of e-wallets. This includes the security and social influence of using e-wallets as
recommended to apply in the future study on Behavioral Intention (BI).

References
Abdullah, N., & Redzuan, F., & Daud, N. A. (2020). E-wallet: Factors influencing user acceptance
towards cashless society in Malaysia among public universities. Indonesian Journal of
Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 20(1), 1-8. doi:10.11591/ijeecs.v20.i1.pp67-
74
Adharsh, R., Harikrishnan, J., Prasad, A., & Venugopal, J. S. (2018). Transformation towards E-
 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-… 15

Wallet payment systems pertaining to Indian youth. International Journal of Pure and Applied
Mathematics, 119(12), 2583-2594.
Alaeddin, O., Altounjy, R., Zainudin, Z., & Kamarudin, F. (2018). From physical to digital:
Investigating consumer behaviour of switching to mobile wallet. Polish Journal of
Management Studies, 17(2), 1-13. doi:10.17512/pjms.2018.17.2.02
Aransyah, M. F., Roy, J., & Aprianti, Y. (2020, March). Innovation resistance and perceive novelty
on e-wallet services. Proceeding Miceb (Mulawarman International Conference on
Economics and Business), 2(6), 115-122.
Chauhan, M., & Shingari, I. (2017). Future of e-wallets: A perspective from under
graduates. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software
Engineering, 7(8), 146.
Chern, Y. X., Kong, S. Y., Lee, V. A., Lim, S. Y., & Ong, C. P. (2018). Moving into cashless society:
Factors affecting adoption of e-wallet (Doctoral dissertation). Universiti Tunku Abdul
Rahman, Petaling jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern
Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295-336.
Chuttur, M. (2009). Overview of the technology acceptance model: Origins, developments and future
directions. Retrieved October 10, 2021, from
https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1289&context=sprouts_all
Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user
information systems: Theory and results (Doctoral dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, MA.
de Luna, I. R., Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Sánchez-Fernández, J., & Muñoz-Leiva, F. (2019). Mobile
payment is not all the same: The adoption of mobile payment systems depending on the
technology applied. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146(5), 931-944.
Hair, E., Halle, T., Terry-Humen, E., Lavelle, B., & Calkins, J. (2006). Children’s school readiness
in the ECLS-K: Predictions to academic, health, and social outcomes in first grade. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 21(4), 431-454.
Kabir, M. A., Saidin, S. Z., & Ahmi, A. (2017). Analysis of factors that influence electronic
payment adoption. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 12(3), 6560-6568.
Kanimozhi, G., & Kamatchi, K. S. (2017). Security aspects of mobile based E wallet. International
Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication, 5(6), 1223-
1228.
Karim, M. W., Haque, A., Ulfy, M. A., Hossain, M. A., & Anis, M. Z. (2020). Factors influencing
the use of E-wallet as a payment method among Malaysian young adults. Journal of
International Business and Management, 3(2), 1-12.
Kim, C., Mirusmonov, M., & Lee, I. (2010). An empirical examination of factors influencing the
intention to use mobile payment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 310-322.
Kowang, T. O., Aziz, F., Hee, O., Goh, C., Lim, K., Saadon, M., & Long, C. S. (2020). E-Wallet
acceptance among undergraduates in Malaysia. Retrieved October 10, 2021, from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ong_Hee/publication/341895171_E-
Wallet_Acceptance_among_Undergraduates_in_Malaysia/links/5ed858664585152945311
73e/E-Wallet-Acceptance-among-Undergraduates-in-Malaysia.pdf
16 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-…

Kustono, A. S., Nanggala, A. Y. A., & Mas’ud, I. (2020). Determinants of the use of e-wallet for
transaction payment among college students. Journal of Economics, Business, and
Accountancy Ventura, 23(1), 85-95.
Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical
review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 40(3), 191-204.
Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Ramos de Luna, I., & Montoro-Ríos, F. (2017). Intention to use new
mobile payment systems: A comparative analysis of SMS and NFC payments. Economic
Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 30(1), 892-910.
Manikandan, S., & Jayakodi, J. M. (2017). An empirical study on consumer adoption of mobile
wallet with special reference to Chennai city. International Journal of Research-
Granthalaya, 5(5), 107-115.
Nizam, F., Hwang, H. J., & Valaei, N. (2018, July). Measuring the effectiveness of E-wallet in
Malaysia. In 3rd IEEE/ACIS International Conference on Big Data, Cloud Computing, and
Data Science Engineering (pp. 59-69). Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Springer.
Patil, A. S., Belhekar, S. P., Burkul, R. S., Sambare, M. V., & Reddy, P. K. T. V. (2019). Review
paper on - Smart wallet. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology
(IRJET), 6(10), 1258-1260.
Pertiwi, D., Suprapto, W., & Pratama, E. (2020). Perceived usage of E-wallet among the Y
generation in Surabaya based on technology acceptance model. Jurnal Teknik
Industri, 22(1), 17-24.
Purwanto, S., Hartini, S., & Premananto, G. C. (2018). The development and testing of technology
acceptance models for consumers towards the intention to use E-wallet. In Proceedings of
International Conference on Innovation in Research (ICIIR 2018) - Section: Economics and
Management Science (vol. 8, pp. 55-61). Noord-Holland, The Netherlands: Atlantis Press.
Rachmawati, I., Witanto, M., Nugroho, A., & Manaf, P. A. (2019). Role of fintech services
providers and stakeholders as drivers in digital payment ecosystems. Retrieved October 10,
2021, from https://www.scitepress.org/Papers/2018/84414/pdf/index.html
Romānova, I., & Kudinska, M. (2017). Banking and Fintech: A challenge or opportunity?
Contemporary Issues in Finance: Current Challenges from Across Europe, 98, 21-35.
Saadon, M. S. I. B., & Long, C. S. (2020). E-wallet acceptance among undergraduates in
Malaysia. Test Engineering & Management, 83(3), 12990-12998.
Safroni, I., Hurriyati, R., & Dirgantari, P. D. (2019). Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) toward
“Dana” E-wallet Costumer. Jurnal Minds: Manajemen, Ide, Inspirasi, 6(2), 181-192.
Seetharaman, A., Kumar, K. N., Palaniappan, S., & Weber, G. (2017). Factors influencing
behavioural intention to use the mobile wallet in Singapore. Journal of Applied Economics
and Business Research, 7(2), 116-136.
Suryono, R. R., Budi, I., & Purwandari, B. (2020). Challenges and trends of financial technology
(Fintech): A systematic literature review. Information, 11(12), Article 590.
Syifa, N., & Tohang, V. (2020). The use of E-wallet system. Conference: 2020 International
Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech), 342(347), 342-347.
doi:10.1109/ICIMTech50083.2020.9211213
Tenk, M. T. T., Yew, H. C., & Heang, L. T. (2020). E-wallet adoption: A case in
Malaysia. International Journal of Research in Commerce and Management Studies, 2(2),
 Ryan Clifford L. Perez. HCMCOUJS-Economics and Business Administration, … (…), …-… 17

216-233.
Thiese, M. S., Ronna, B., & Ott, U. (2016). P value interpretations and considerations. Journal of
Thoracic Disease, 8(9), Article E928.
Vučinić, M. (2020). Fintech and financial stability potential influence of fintech on financial
stability, risks and benefits. Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice, 9(2), 43-66.
Weng, F., & Yang, R.-J., & Ho, H.-J., & Su, H.-M. (2018). A TAM-based study of the attitude
towards use intention of multimedia among school teachers. Applied System Innovation, 1(3),
1-9. doi:10.3390/asi1030036
Xian, C. Y., Yien, K. S., Ai, L. V., Yi, L. S., & Ping, O. C. (2018). Moving into cashless society:
Factors affecting adoption of E-wallet (Master’s thesis, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman,
Petaling jaya, Selangor). Retrieved October 10, 2021, from
http://eprints.utar.edu.my/3089/1/fyp_BF_2018_CYX.pdf
Yan, H., & Pan, K. (2014, June). Examine user adoption of mobile payment using the TAM: A trust
transfer perspective. Retrieved October 10, 2021, from
https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1060&context=whiceb2014
Yang, M., Mamun, A., Mohiuddin, M., che nawi, N., & Zainol, N. (2021). Cashless transactions: A
study on intention and adoption of E-wallets. Sustainability, 13(2), 1-18.
doi:10.3390/su13020831

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.