Functional, psychological and emotional barriers and the resistance to the use of digital banking services
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-07-2020-0093Palavras-chave:
Resistance to innovation, Digital banking services, Functional barriers, Psychological barriers, Emotional barriersResumo
Purpose – The present paper aims to understand the influence of consumer’s functional, psychological and
emotional barriers to the use of digital banking services.
Design/methodology/approach – The authors carried out a quantitative study in which data were
collected through a self-administered online questionnaire. A final sample of 202 Brazilian adults, with and
without experience in using digital banking services, enabled the test of research hypotheses by means of a
structural equation modeling approach.
Findings – The authors found statistical evidence that supports the hypothesis that psychological barriers,
emotional barriers and user experience positively influence the resistance to the use of digital banking
services. However, there is no empirical evidence supporting that the influence of functional barriers affects
the resistance to the use of digital banking services.
Practical implications – Efforts to understand the mechanisms that lead consumers to adopt or reject
innovative products or services are important to prevent investments in these innovations, avoiding revenue
failures. The results provide managerial implications by favoring the creation of communication programs
capable of reducing the possibilities of innovation failure.
Originality/value – The main theoretical contribution of this work is the identification of the predominant
influence of emotional barriers, in comparison to functional barriers, on the resistance to innovation in digital
banking services. Currently, the models that illustrate resistance to innovation tend to focus solely on
functional aspects; however, these models can be improved by incorporating emotional aspects.
Downloads
Referências
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
Bagozzi, R., & Lee, K. (1999). Consumer resistance to, and acceptance of, innovations. Advances in
Consumer Research, 26(1), 218–225.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review,
(2), 191–215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory: Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Castellion, G., & Markham, S.K. (2013). Perspective: New product failure rates: Influence of
argumentum ad populum and self-interest. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5),
–979.
Castro, C.A.B. (2018), The relationship between affect and consumers¨ resistance to innovation,
(Doctoral thesis, Fundação Getúlio Vargas, São Paulo, Brazil), FGV EAESP Pesquisa, Available
from: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/handle/10438/20687.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
Bagozzi, R., & Lee, K. (1999). Consumer resistance to, and acceptance of, innovations. Advances in
Consumer Research, 26(1), 218–225.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review,
(2), 191–215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory: Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Castellion, G., & Markham, S.K. (2013). Perspective: New product failure rates: Influence of
argumentum ad populum and self-interest. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5),
–979.
Castro, C.A.B. (2018), The relationship between affect and consumers¨ resistance to innovation,
(Doctoral thesis, Fundação Getúlio Vargas, São Paulo, Brazil), FGV EAESP Pesquisa, Available
from: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/handle/10438/20687.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
Bagozzi, R., & Lee, K. (1999). Consumer resistance to, and acceptance of, innovations. Advances in
Consumer Research, 26(1), 218–225.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review,
(2), 191–215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory: Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Castellion, G., & Markham, S.K. (2013). Perspective: New product failure rates: Influence of
argumentum ad populum and self-interest. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5),
–979.
Castro, C.A.B. (2018), The relationship between affect and consumers¨ resistance to innovation,
(Doctoral thesis, Fundação Getúlio Vargas, São Paulo, Brazil), FGV EAESP Pesquisa, Available
from: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/handle/10438/20687.
Ram, S., & Sheth, J. (1989). Consumer resistance to innovations: The marketing problem and its
solutions. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 6(2), 5–14.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Becker, J.M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. Available From: www.smartpls.com
(Retrieved 10 May 2020).
Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed.: Free Press, New York, NY.
Russell, J.A., & Mehrabian, A. (1977). Evidence for a three-factor theory of emotions. Journal of
Research in Personality, 11, 273–294.
So, J., Chethana, A., Daheem, H., Nidhi, A., Adam, D., & Durairaj, M. (2015). The psychology of
appraisal: Specific emotions and decision-making. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(3),
–371.
Szmigin, I., & Foxall, G. (1998). Three forms of innovation resistance: The case of retail payment
methods. Technovation, 18(6/7), 459–468.
Talke, K., & Heidenreich, S. (2014). How to overcome pro-change bias: Incorporating passive and active
innovation resistance in innovation decision models. The Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 31(5). 894–907.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing
models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176.
Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A., & Howell, J.M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model
of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 124–143.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., & Davis, F. (2003). User acceptance of information technology:
Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3),425–478.
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
• O(s) autor(es) autoriza(m) a publicação do artigo na revista;
• O(s) autor(es) garante(m) que a contribuição é original e inédita e que não está em processo de avaliação em outra(s) revista(s);
• A revista não se responsabiliza pelas opiniões, ideias e conceitos emitidos nos textos, por serem de inteira responsabilidade de seu(s) autor(es);
• É reservado aos editores o direito de proceder ajustes textuais e de adequação do artigos às normas da publicação.
