Why Does People Use E-Payment Systems in C2C

E-Marketplace? A Trust Transfer Perspective

Rito Septi Tombe Rika K. Ekawati N. F. Ayuning Budi A. Nizar Hidayanto P. Anussornnitisarn
Department of
Faculty of Computer Computerized Faculty of Computer Faculty of Computer Industrial
Science Accounting Science Science Engineering
University of Indonesia STMIK GI MDP University of Indonesia University of Indonesia Kasetsart University
Jakarta, Indonesia Palembang, Indonesia Jakarta, Indonesia Jakarta, Indonesia Bangkok, Thailand
ritotombe@gmail.com rika@mdp.ac.id nurfitriah@cs.ui.ac.id nizar@cs.ui.ac.id fengpta@ku.ac.th

Abstract—Consumer-to-consumer (C2C) e-marketplace is
one of the most popular forms of e-commerce today, where trust
plays important role in it. This study aims to investigate the trust
transfer process between sellers and e-payment systems, as well
as analyze their impact on e-payment systems acceptance in C2C
e-marketplace. The data was collected by distributing online and
offline questionnaires to C2C e-commerce users in Indonesia. We
obtained data from 249 respondents and then subsequently
processed the data using structural equation modeling (SEM)
with the help of AMOS 22.0 software. The result of this study
shows that trust to the seller is influenced by disposition to trust
and positive reputation. In addition, this study also concludes
that the trust in the e-payment system is affected by the quality of
e-payment and the recommendations of others. Furthermore, this
study proved that the transfer of trust from the seller to the e-
payment system can affect the intention to use the e-payment
systems.
Keywords—AMOS, C2C e-marketplace, e-payment, Trust ,
intention to use , the displacement of the trust , SEM , a source of
trust
I. INTRODUCTION
The rapid growth of Internet usage in Indonesia drives the
increase of online transactions, particularly on the consumer-
to-consumer (C2C) e-marketplace sites. Examples of C2C e-
marketplace sites in Indonesia are Lazada, FJB Kaskus,
Tokopedia, Bukalapak, and others. C2C e-marketplace is a
unique business concept because all users can become sellers
or buyers at the same time [2].
Each C2C e-marketplace site typically adopts a particular
payment system for making the transactions. The most widely
used payment system in Indonesia is bank transfer and cash on
delivery (COD) [3]. Although cash on delivery (COD) is one
of the most frequently used payment systems in online
transactions, COD is not an electronic payment system [4].
COD does not include electronic payments because the method
used in COD involves cash or physical meetings between the
buyer and the seller/courier [5]. Unfortunately, in Indonesia,
COD which is synonymous with cash payments, becomes one
of the popular payouts even though the Indonesian government
is vigorously promoting cashless.
One of the reasons for the popularity of cash payments in
C2C transaction is the interaction between sellers and buyers in
the C2C e-marketplace without face-to-face contact. This leads
to the need for the buyer to trust the seller before the
transaction is made [6]. Trust is a person's belief that is driven
by evidence where the person's needs are fulfilled by the
person entrusted [7].
Previous works that discussed the trust and its impact on
intent to buy on the C2C e-marketplace have been pretty much
done [2, 8, 9]. However, these studies only focus on the
antecedents and outcomes of trust. In earlier literature, a trust
may move from one entity to another independent, but related
entity, this is called the trust transfer theory [10]. This trust
transfer process is evident in various contexts such as e-
government [11] and the transfer of trust in e-commerce
acceptance [12] which demonstrates the importance of this
trust transfer process in influencing user decisions.
In this research, we are interested to find out how the
process of trust transfers occurred in the context of e-payment,
so that recommendations can be formulated to increase the use
of e-payment in C2C e-martketplace and reduce transactions
using cash. In sum, our research questions are as follows: 1)
What are the factors that affect the trust on the seller and the e-
payment system? 2) Can the trust on the seller can be
transferred to the e-payment system? 3) How trust in e-
payment systems can influence customers to use e-payment
system?
II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
A. E-Payment
E-payment systems can be interpreted as payment that is
initiated, processed, and received electronically [13]. The
definition is similar with the opinion of Kim et al. [14] which
stated that e-payment is the transfer of payer’s electronic
payments to payee via a web-based IT infrastructure. Based on
these two opinions, it can be concluded that the e-payment
system is any form of payment made through internet media
(web based). There are several existing or frequently used
payment systems, including credit cards, bank transfers,
electronic wallets, cash on delivery, loans, and postal orders
[15]. However, according to Falkner et al. [16], the most
widely used payment systems for e-commerce are credit &
debit cards and electronic wallets. Meanwhile, loan can be
categorized as credit card.
B. Trust Transfer
Trust is a person's belief driven by evidence where the
person's needs are fulfilled by the person entrusted [7]. Trust
can be enhanced by taking into account the quality of security,
privacy, and service [17]. Doney and Cannon [10] gave an
example that people can trust in a company if they trust the
company's salesperson. The example shows the relationship
between salesperson and company, each of which is a
different entity in which they have no dependence on each
other but remain related, in this case the salesperson can be
trusted even if the company is not trusted and vice versa. This
is in line with the opinion of Belanche et al. [11], the trust in
an entity may be transferred or transferred to another entity, or
simply called as trust transfer.
III. HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
C2C e-commerce marketplace involves several important
entities like the seller and buyer, as well as supporting
infrastructure namely the internet and the e-payment systems.
Piarna [18] showed that the website quality significantly
affects the trust of e-commerce customers. This implies that
buyers usually rely on cues of trust before making transaction,
which may come from the seller or the system used to transact
(website). The proposed research model will evaluate the
signals/cues of trust in the seller and e-payment systems, as
well as how the trust transfer process takes place in the C2C e-
commerce marketplace.
A. Sources of Trust to Seller
Prior to making a purchase, the buyer usually evaluates
cues of trust, either in form of disposition to trust [19], the
positive reputation owned by the seller [20], or the
geographical distance that separates the buyer and the seller
[21]. The buyer's experience will then shape the buyer's trust
in others [19]. Thus, if a person has a high tendency to trust
others, then the disposition to trust of buyer should have a
positive effect on trust to the seller in C2C e-marketplace, and
vice versa. A seller will certainly also maintain his/her
positive reputation in order to be trusted by the buyers.
Furthermore, distance is also a cue of trust to the seller. The
further the distance between the buyer and the seller, they are
less likely to meet [21]. The face-to-face meeting between the
seller and buyer is an important factor to reduce the risk of
transacting [2]. Considering this, we propose the following
hypotheses:
H1: Disposition to trust of buyer has positive impact on trust
to the seller
H2: Positive reputation of seller has positive impact on trust
to the seller
H3: Geographical distance between seller and buyer has
negative impact on trust to the seller
B. Impact of Trust in the Internet
According to Belanche et al. [11], Internet is the main
medium that allows buyers and sellers do not need to meet to
perform a transaction. In order to ensure the transaction
running succesfully, it requires a reliable internet network.
Having this, the buyers do not have to worry that their
transactions using the e-payment system will fail. Transaction
failures can cause more efforts to be done by the buyer, such
as contacting the seller or other parties such as the bank. Thus,
confidence in the reliability of the internet can affect the trust
of e-payment system and the seller, so formulated hypothesis
as follows:
H4: The buyer’s trust in the internet has a positive impact on
his/her trust to the e-payment systems
H5: The buyer’s trust in the internet has a positive impact on
his/her trust to the seller
C. Source of Trust in E-payment Systems
High quality of e-services indicates the goodwill of the
company and will increase the buyer's trust so that the
transaction will be successful [11]. The quality of the e-
payment systems can be seen from the security protection
provided by the system [14], so that all financial transactions
and buyer’s personal data are kept confidential [19]. Thus, the
quality of the e-payment system will affect the buyer’s trust on
the e-payment system. Therefore, we posit a hypothesis as
follows:
H6: The quality of the e-payment system will have a positive
effect on buyer’s trust to e-payment system
In addition, according to Belanche et al. [11], positive
information from non-commercial sources may affect the use
of e-services as it can reduce hesitancy in the use of electronic
services. E-payment related information from non-commercial
sources such as close friends or relatives can certainly be more
reliable because it is not usually aimed at making money or
personal gain, thereby leading to a higher trust in e-payment
systems that may have been unknown to buyers [22]. Thus, we
can formulate a hypothesis as follows:
H7: Recommendations have a positive impact on buyer’s
trust to e-payment systems
D. Trust Transfer from Seller to E-Payment Systems
Meents & Verhagen [2] said that consumers usually want
to meet with sellers on the C2C e-marketplace site to make
payments due to lack of trust between sellers and buyers. So, it
can be concluded if the buyer can trust the seller then the
buyer should also be able to trust the use of e-payment
systems. Hence we draw the following hypothesis:
H8: Buyer’s trust to the seller has a positive impact on
buyer’s trust to the e-payment systems
E. Antecedent of the Buyer’s Intention to Use E-payment
Systems
The intention to use of e-payment systems is generally
determined by the buyer’s attitudinal belief on the e-payment
systems. Buyer’s perceived benefits to the e-payment system
will surely increase the intent to use of the system [19, 23],
and the risks perceived by the buyer on the e-payment systems
usage may degrade buyers' intention to use the system [19]. In
addition, the buyers’ trust in the e-payment system may also
increase the intention to use the e-payment systems because
the buyer will be sure that the e-payment system will perform
its functions properly as a medium of financial transactions
even without any face to face meeting with the seller. Thus,
we can posit the following hypothesis:
H9: The benefits perceived by the buyer have a positive
effect on the buyer's intention to use e-payment systems
H10: The risks perceived by the buyer have a negative effect
on the buyer intention to use e-payment system
H11: The buyer’s trust in e-payment system has a positive
effect on the buyer intention to use e-payment systems
Based on the above hypotheses, our research model can be
seen in Figure 1.
Fig. 1. Research Model
IV. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Research Instrument
This research used a quantitative approach by
disseminating a questionnaire to C2C e-marketplace users in
Indonesia. The respondents should express their agreeness to
each statement in the questionnaire by using 5-point Likert
scale (1 represents strongly disagree and 5 represents totally
agree). The questionnaire was prepared by adapting previous
studies such as disposition to trust [19, 24], positive reputation
[8, 19], perceived geographical separation [21],
recommendation [11], trust to seller [11], trust to e-payment
systems [8], trust to Internet [11], perceived benefits [19],
perceived risks [9, 25], and intention to use [9, 19]. The e-
payment systems quality is represented as a second order
construct consisting of perceived privacy protection [19],
perceived security protection [19], and system availability
[26]. In total, there are 51 indicators used in the questionnaire.
B. Data Collection Procedure
To speed up the data collection process, the questionnaire
was distributed both online and offline. The online
questionnaire was prepared using Google form application,
which subsequently distributed to Kaskus as the biggest
platform for online trading in Indonesia and trading forums on
Facebook. The offline questionnaire was spreaded in public
places such as shopping centers in Depok area. We also ensure
the respondents have experiences in using the e-payment
systems in C2C e-marketplace.
C. Data Evaluation Method
Data collected was subsequently processed using
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) technique with the help
of Amos 22.0. The SEM data analysis consists of two main
step processes [27]. The first step is to test the reliability and
the validity of the questionnaire’s indicators or called
measurement model test by looking at the loading factor,
composite reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant
validity [28]. The second step is the structural model test [27],
which can be performed by looking at the coefficient of
determination (R2) and path coefficient [28].
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Demographics of Respondents
From the data collection process, we obtained 249
respondents who are e-payment users in C2C e-marketplace.
Of the 249 respondents, male respondents amounted 144
(58%) and women amounted to 105 (42%). From the age
demographics, respondents aged under 20 years were 67
respondents (27%), 21 to 30 years old were 16 respondents
(65%), 31 to 40 years old were 17 respondents (7%), and the
remaining 3 respondents (1%) . In terms of employment, 142
respondents were student (57%), 81 respondents were
employee (32%), 17 respondents were entrepreneurs (7%) and
the rests as many as 4% were housewives, etc. The most
common e-payment systems used by the respondents to
conduct online transactions are internet banking as many as
133 (53%), credit/debit card as many as 66 (27%) and escrow
accounts as many as 30 (12%). Other payment systems
include e-cash (9 respondents), m-banking (8 respondents),
and electronic vouchers (3 respondents). Most respondents
have also used the e-payment system more than five times
(64%).
B. Analysis with SEM Method
As has been explained earlier, the SEM processing
involves two main stages, namely the measurement model test
and the structural model test. The measurement model test was
conducted by examining the value of loading factor, Average
Variance Extracted (AVE), and Composite Reliability (CR),
as well as discriminant validity. From 51 indicators, the
loading factor of PB2, PSP2, SA3, and RISK1 did not fulfill
the criteria of validity (>= 0.7) so that these indicators were
removed. As Zeinita and Otok point out [29] that the
minimum value used to assess CR (or said to have good
reliability) is 0.70. After all indicators that fail to meet the
loading factor load were removed from the model, the
calculation results showed that all variables have met the
requirements of AVE> 0.5 and CR> 0.7 so that all variables
are said to be reliable. The full results of AVE and CR
calculation for each variable can be seen in Table I.
 TABLE I. THE VALUES OF AVE AND CR
Hypothesis PATH C.R p Conclusion
Construct AVE CR Trust_Sellerĸ
H3 Perceived_Geographical_S -,684 ,494 Rejected
Perceived_Benefit 0.717 0.909 eparation
Perceived_Risk 0.617 0.793 Trust_EPayment_System
H4 ĸ 5,773 *** Accepted
Intention_to_Use 0.663 0.885 Trust Internet
Trust_Internet 0.654 0.850 Trust_Sellerĸ
H5 7,115 *** Accepted
Trust_Epayment_System 0.859 0.960 Trust_Internet

Trust_Seller 0.523 0.763 Trust_Epayment_System

H6 ĸ 3,889 *** Accepted
Dispotition_to_Trust 0.616 0.885 EPQuality
Trust_Epayment_System
Positive_Reputation 0.686 0.914 H7 ĸ 2,192 ,028 Accepted
Perceived_Privacy_Protection 0.692 0.930 Recommendation
Trust_Epayment_System
Perceived_Security_Protection 0.833 0.937 H8 ĸ 2,532 ,011 Accepted
System_Availability 0.859 0.923 Trust_Seller
Recommendation 0.789 0.917 Intention_to_Useĸ
H9 4,646 *** Accepted
Perceived_Benefit
Perceived_Geographical_Separation 0.807 0.925
Intention_to_Useĸ
H10 -,183 ,855 Rejected
Perceived_Risk
Discriminant validity test results also showed that the
correlation values among some variable and other variables H11
Intention_to_Useĸ
6,044 *** Accepted
were lower than the square root of AVE value of the variable, Trust_Epayment_System
so it is said that all variables have represented different and
unrelated concepts. C. Discussion
This research successfully answers 3 research questions
After all indicators have been declared as valid and
that have been proposed, first is antecedents of trust to seller
reliable, we performed the goodness of fit (GOF) calculation.
and e-payment systems, second is trust transfer process in e-
The goodness of fit was estimated using maximum likelihood
payment systems, and third is antecedents of intention of use
(ML) estimation [30]. We used four criteria to assess the GOF,
to e-payment systems.
namely RMSEA, CMIN/ DF, TLI, and CFI. As can be seen in
Table II, the GOF indicators indicate that the model is fit, so Based on the results of hypothesis testing, it is concluded
that we can continue to the structural model test. that cues/signals of trust to sellers in C2C e-marketplace are
disposition to trust and positive reputation. While perceived
TABLE II. THE CALCULATION OF GOF
geographical separation does not show to have a significant
effect on trust to seller. The results of this study support
Parameter Result Limit Information previous studies [20, 19, 21]. In the case of C2C e-
Chi-squared 1202.354 chi-squared marginal fit marketplace sites, the seller and the buyer encounters are only
taking place in cyberspace, thus it might reduce buyer’s trust
CMIN/DF 1.173028293 <2 good fit to seller. Therefore, the buyer needs cues that show the seller's
RMSEA 0.013160604 <0.05 good fit positive reputation as a sign that the seller is trustworthy. The
CFI 0.975335038 >0.9 good fit buyer's experience in online transactions can also form a
disposition to trust of the buyer to others, which will affect
TLI 0.999975933 >0.9 good fit his/her trust to the seller. The more buyers gain positive
experiences in online transactions, the greater the disposition
The results of the structural model test can be seen in to trust of him/her to others. This implies the importance of
Table III. According to the results, two hypotheses were sellers to maintain the trust of buyers, by providing good
rejected (H3 and H10) and nine hypotheses were accepted at service and not cheating during transactions in C2C e-
95% confidence level. commerce even though sellers and buyers are located far
away.
TABLE III. THE RESULTS OF STRUCTURAL MODEL TEST Hypothesis test results also showed that the trust of e-
payment system is influenced by the quality of e-payment
Hypothesis PATH C.R p Conclusion systems itself. The quality of e-payment systems in this study
is measured by the security and privacy protection provided by
H1
Trust_Sellerĸ
3,915 *** Accepted the system and the availability of the system. This shows that
Disposition_to_Trust a good quality of e-payment systems can increase buyers' trust
Trust_Sellerĸ
to e-payment systems. When conducting online transactions,
H2 6,735 *** Accepted many sensitive data are involved so that the security features
Positive_Reputation
provided by the e-payment systems can enhance buyers' trust
to e-payment systems. In addition, the characteristics of the
Internet that allow buyers to transact anytime and anyplace
demanded e-payment systems should be able to be used
whenever desired, so the availability of the e-payment system
can increase buyers' trust to the e-payment system. The results
are consistent with findings from Kim et al. [19] and Belanche
et al. [11].
Related to trust transfer process in the e-payment system as
the second research question, the results of hypothesis testing
in this study showed that trust of buyer to sellers can affect
his/her trust in the e-payment system. This result is in in line
with the trust transfers theory proposed by Doney & Canon
[10], which means if the buyer trusts the seller then the trust
will be transferred to the e-payment system, so the buyer does
not have to meet face to face with the seller to perform a
transaction using e-payment systems [2].
Related to the third research question, the antecedents of
the intention to use e-payment system in C2C e-marketplace
are trust to e-payment systems and perceived benefits of using
e-payment system. The results also showed that the perceived
risk does not affect the intention to use the e-payment systems.
The more the one trusts e-payment system, the higher his/her
intention to use the system. The results of this study support
the finding of Lu et al. [31], that the trust in the e-payment
system affects the intention to use the system. This result is
also consistent with the finding of Hidayanto et al. [32, 33]
which indicated that Indonesian consumers tend to ignore risk
perceptions while transacting in e-commerce site.
D. Implications
To increase the trust in the seller at the C2C e-marketplace
site, a good reputation of the seller is imperative. Positive
reputation of the seller can be built by fulfilling promises to
consumers, being honest in transactions, and paying more
attention to meeting consumer demand [20]. C2C e-
marketplace needs to build a system that can indicate a
positive reputation of the sellers for example through rating
and review system. The results also show that the quality of
the e-payment system is a factor that consumers consider
before they use the e-payment system. To that end, the e-
payment service providers should pay attention to
safeguarding practices such as preventing fraud by using user
verification methods and protecting the confidentiality of all
users’ personal data. In addition, the government needs to
make regulations for providers to provide a reliable Internet
infrastructure, because the trust of the Internet affects the trust
to e-payment systems.
From the theoretical side, this research fills the existing
gap theory related to the concept of trust in the e-payment
system. This study showed that the concept of trust transfer
theory also applies to the context of e-payment systems. This
opens up new perspectives on the antecedents of using e-
payment systems, which currently have only been regarded as
trust factors that directly influence the use of e-payment
systems without passing through the process of trust transfer
as in the studies of [8, 19, 33].
VI. CONCLUSION
A. Conclusion
The results of this study indicated that there is a transfer of
trust (trust transfer) from seller to e-payment system in the
C2C e-marketplace. Another result of the research is buyers’
trust in the internet affects their trust to the sellers and the e-
payment systems. While the buyer’s intention to use e-
payment system on C2C e-marketplace sites is influenced by
buyer’s trust on e-payment system and perceived benefit in
using the e-payment system. Perceived risk shows not to have
a significant effect on the intention to use e-payment systems.
This suggests that in order for e-payment systems to be
increasingly used by the buyers, C2C e-marketplace providers
need to equip their platform with the reputation systems to
indicate the trustworthiness of a seller such as rating, number
of successful transactions already made, and so on.
B. Suggestion
Further research can use the concept of trust transfer on
other form of e-commerce such as B2C and B2B e-
marketplace so as to obtain the characteristic of trust transfer
in various e-commerce setting. In addition, this research is
only focus on intention to use, further research can discuss
about the influence of trust transfer to the e-payment system
loyalty (continuance usage intention).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We gratefully thank the Universitas Indonesia for the
International Publication Grants for Student Thesis for
financial support. Grant no. 393/UN2.R3.1/HKP.05.00/2017.
REFERENCES
[1] APJII; PUSKAKOM UI. (2015, April 14). Profil Pengguna Internet di
Indonesia 2014. (Pertama). (P. Marius, Sapto, Anggoro, & C. i. King,
Penyunt.) Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia: Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa
Internet Indonesia.
[2] Meents, S., & Verhagen, T. (2008). Investigating the impact of C2C
electronic marketplace quality on trust. Vrije Universiteit, Faculty of
Economics and Business Administration.
[3] Tech in Asia. (2013, November 24). Startup Asia Jakarta 2013: State of
e-commerce in Indonesia. Dipetik November 29, 2015, dari
slideshare.net: http://www.slideshare.net/TechinAsia/startup-asia-
jakarta-2013-state-of-ecommerce-in-indonesia.
[4] OECD. (2006). Online Payment Systems for E-commerce. 117. OECD
Publishing.
[5] International Post Corporation. (2011). Strategic Insights Payment in e-
commerce. Dipetik November 4, 2015, dari www.ipc.be:
https://www.ipc.be/~/media/documents/public/strategic-
perspectives/si_2011/si_epayments_p.pdf
[6] Hardiyanti, Maulina. (2012). Kepercayaan Pada Penjual dan Persepsi
Resiko Pada Keputusan Pembelian Melalui Internet (Online)
[7] Cofta, P. (2006). Convergence and trust in eCommerce. BT Technology
Journal, 24(2), 214.
[8] Chandra, S., Srivastava, S. C., & Theng, Y.-L. (2010). Evaluating the
Role of Trust in Consumer Adoption of Mobile Payment Systems: An
Empirical Analysis. Communications of the Association for Information
Systems, 27(29), 561-588.
[9] Ling, K. C., Daud, D. b., Piew, T. H., Keoy, K. H., & Hassan, P. (2011, Prestasi Dosen Menggunakan Metode Split (Score Factor).
Juni). Perceived Risk, Perceived Technology, Online Trust for the In STATISTIKA: Forum Teori dan Aplikasi Statistika (Vol. 10, No. 2).
Online Purchase Intention in Malaysia. International Journal of [30] Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003).
Business and Management, 6(6), 167-181. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance
[10] Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997, April). An Examination of the and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of psychological
Nature of Trust in Buyer-Seller Relationships. Journal of Marketing, research online, 8(2), 23-74.
61(2), 35-51. [31] Lu, Y., Yang, S., Chau, P., & Cao, Y. (2011). Dynamics between the
[11] Belanche, D., Casalo, L. V., Flavian, C., & Schepers, J. (2014). Trust trust transfer process and intention to use mobile payment services: A
transfer in the continued usage of public e-services. Information & cross-environment perspective. Information & Management, 48(8), 393-
Management, 51(6), 627-640. 403.
[12] Yang, Q., Huang, L., & Xu, Y. (2008). Role of trust transfer in e- [32] Hidayanto, A. N., Saifulhaq, H., & Handayani, P. W. (2012, June). Do
commerce acceptance. Tsinghua Science & Technology, 13(3), 279-286. consumers really care on risks in online shopping? An analysis from
[13] Raja, J., & Velmurgan, M. S. (2008, April). E-payments: Problems and Indonesian online consumers. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on
Prospects. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 13(1), 1-17. Management of Innovation and Technology (ICMIT), (pp. 331-336).
[14] Kim, C., Tao, W., Shin, N., & Kim, K.-S. (2010). An empirical study of [33] Hidayanto, A. N., Hidayat, L. S., Sandhyaduhita, P. I., & Handayani, P.
customers’ perceptions of security and trust in e-payment systems. W. (2015). Examining the relationship of payment system characteristics
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9(1), 84-95 and behavioural intention in e-payment adoption: a case of Indonesia.
International Journal of Business Information Systems, 19(1), 58-86.
[15] Mangiaracina, R., & Perego, A. (2009). Payment systems in the B2c
eCommerce: Are they a barrier for the online customer? . Internet
Banking Commerce , 14(3), 1-16.
[16] Falkner, B., Zeltmann, S., Griffin, K., & Friedman, W. (2014).
Competing technologies in support of electronic payments. Competition
Forum, 12(1), 41-48.
[17] Brendon, C. (2002). In ecommerce, customer trust is no longer an
option: It is the requirement for success.In ASQ World Conference on
Quality and Improvement Proceedings(p.56). Denver: American Society
of Quality.
[18] Piarna, Rian. (2014). Pengaruh Sumber Informasi dan Kualitas Website
terhadap Kepercayaan Pelanggan dalam Menentukan Keputusan
Bertransaksi pada E-commerce (Studi pada Pelanggan E-commerce di
Indonesia). Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen Volume 12 Nomor 1 Maret
2014
[19] Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer
decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust,
perceived risk, and their antecendents. Desicion Support Systems, 44(2),
544-564
[20] Strader, T. J., & Ramaswami, S. N. (2002, December). THE VALUE
OF SELLER TRUSTWORTHINESS IN C2C ONLINE MARKETS.
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 45(12), 45-49.
[21] Lo, L. Y.-S., & Lin, S.-W. (2014). Love and Romantism through IS: The
Antecendants of Desire for Interaction. Study of Dating App Users'
Desire for Interaction. Auckland: Thirty Fifth International Conference
on Information Systems.
[22] Cahill, V. (2003). Using trust for secure collaboration in uncertain
environments. Pervasive Computing, 2(3), 52-61.
[23] Purwanegara, M., Apriningsih, A., & Andika, F. (2014). Snapshot on
Indonesia Regulation in Mobile Internet Banking Users Attitudes. The
5th Indonesia International Conference on Innovation,
Entrepreneurship, and Small Business (IICIES 2013).115, hal. 147-155.
Elsevier Ltd.
[24] Ho, K. K., & See-To, E. W. (2010). An Exploratory Study on the Impact
of Trust on Different E-Payment Gateways: Octopus Card Vs. Credit
Card. In PACIS (p.42). PACIS 2010 Proceedings.
[25] Martin, J., Mortimer, G., & Andrews, L. (2015). Re-examining online
customer experience to include purchase frequency and perceived risk.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 25, 81-95.
[26] Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, V. A. (2005, February). A Multiple-Item
Scale for Assessing Electronic Service Quality. Journal of Service
Research, 7(3), 213-233.
[27] Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a
silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152.
[28] Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Smith, D., Reams, R., & Hair, J. F. (2014).
Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): A useful
tool for family business researchers. Journal of Family Business
Strategy, 5(1), 105-115.
[29] Zeinita, A., & Otok, B. W. (2010, October). Pengembangan Structural
Equation Modeling pada Moderasi Kepribadian Terhadap Indeks