The cognitive and affective pathways of FinTech adoption: a trait-to-state-to-intention mechanism
Résumé fourni par la source
Introduction: This study investigates how consumers' technology readiness traits shape key psychological drivers-trust, perceived usefulness (PU), and perceived ease of use (PEOU)-and how these factors jointly determine FinTech adoption intention. Methods: Survey data from 336 Chinese consumers were analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to test an integrated Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), trust, and technology readiness framework. Results: The results reveal that PU and PEOU significantly predict adoption intention, with PEOU also exerting an indirect effect via PU. Trust acts as a foundational enabler, directly increasing adoption intention while simultaneously enhancing both PU and PEOU. Crucially, the dimensions of technology readiness operate through distinct cognitive and affective pathways. Optimism indirectly drives adoption by fostering trust, PU, and PEOU, whereas innovativeness directly increases intention while enhancing trust and PEOU. Conversely, inhibitor traits manifest differently: discomfort specifically reduces PEOU, whereas insecurity directly undermines trust. Discussion: The findings demonstrate that technology readiness influences FinTech adoption through distinct psychological pathways rather than as a uniform set of antecedents. The study thus provides a trait-to-state-to-intention explanation of how stable consumer predispositions shape FinTech adoption.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- The cognitive and affective pathways of FinTech adoption: a trait-to-state-to-intention mechanism
- Date Crossref
- 24/08/2026
- Éditeur
- Frontiers Media SA
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.