How people pay: Evidence from grocery store data

Klee, Elizabeth

doi:10.1016/j.jmoneco.2008.01.009

Cited by 180 publications

(161 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

138

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Borzekowski, Kiser & Ahmed, 2008;Zinman, 2009) . These two strands of the literature have been rather separate but share many similarities; our paper contributes to recent attempts to bridge this gap (Klee 2008 transaction characteristics, though these have been shown to be of significant importance (Boeschoten 1998, Bounie & Francois 2006, Hayashi & Klee 2003. By contrast, we can use direct survey information about each group of potentially important factors -transaction and personal characteristics, proxy variables for the relative costs of cash and card usage, and assessments of given payment medium characteristics.…”

Section: Ecb Working Paper Series No 1144mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Choosing and using payment instruments: evidence from German microdata

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. The aim of the conference was to better understand current developments in retail payment markets and to identify possible future trends, by bringing together policy conduct, research activities and market practice. The conference was organised around two major topics: first, the economic and regulatory implications of a more integrated retail payments market and, second, the strands of innovation and modernisation in the retail payments business. To make innovations successful, expectations and requirements of retail payment users have to be taken seriously. The conference has shown that these expectations and requirements are strongly influenced by the growing demand for alternative banking solutions, the increasing international mobility of individuals and companies, a loss of trust in the banking industry and major social trends such as the ageing population in developed countries. There are signs that customers see a need for more innovative payment solutions. Overall, the conference led to valuable findings which will further stimulate our efforts to foster the economic underpinnings of innovation and integration in retail banking and payments. Terms of use: Documents inWe would like to take this opportunity to thank all participants in the conference. In particular, we would like to acknowledge the valuable contributions of all presenters, discussants, session chairs and panellists, whose names can be found in the enclosed conference programme. Their main statements are summarised in the ECB-DNB official conference summary. Twelve papers related to the conference have been accepted for publication in this special series of the ECB Working Papers Series.Behind the scenes, a number of colleagues from the ECB and DNB contributed to both the organisation of the conference and the preparation of this conference report. Abstract 4 Non-technical summary 5

show abstract

Section: Ecb Working Paper Series No 1144mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, time costs differ (Klee, 2008). Ex post, we may always order transactions by the ease with which they can be carried out using a given payment instrument.…”

Section: Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Choosing and using payment instruments: evidence from German microdata

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, we estimate shares of all transactions paid with each of the (up to) seven payment instruments that consumers have adopted. Klee (2008) used a choice of debit or check at checkout as a measure of use, but lacked data on the intensity of use and on demographic attributes of individual consumers. In Ching and Hayashi (2010), the only measure of use was a consumer's preferred payment instrument, and no estimation of either the extensive or intensive margins of payment use were included.…”

Section: Payments Usementioning

confidence: 99%

How Consumers Pay: Adoption and Use of Payments

Schuh

Stavins

2013

AFR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using data from a nationally representative survey of U.S. consumers, we estimate Heckman two-stage regressions on the adoption and use of seven different payment instruments. We find that the characteristics of payment instruments are important in determining consumer payment behavior, even when controlling for demographic and financial attributes: difficulty to setup and keep records are especially important in explaining adoption of payments, while ease of use, cost and security are important in explaining which methods consumers use for transactions. For the first time, the number of payment methods adopted by consumers conditional on having access to a bank account is estimated, as the unbanked consumers' payment choices are much more limited than those of consumers with bank accounts. Because cost is found to significantly affect payment use, a potential increase in the cost of credit or debit cards following recent regulatory changes affecting those payment methods may lead to a reduction in U.S. consumers' reliance on payment cards for transactions.

show abstract

“…Davis (1989), Davis et al (1989), Jonker (2007, Klee (2008) and Schuh and Stavins (2010) Area_of_Residence Denotes the natural logarithm of the population of the city/town/village in which the respondent resides (in thousands of people).…”

Section: Perceived_usefulnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gan et al (2006) and Klee (2008) Gender Takes a value of one if the respondent is a male and zero otherwise. Senior Takes the value of one for respondents above 65 years of age and zero otherwise.…”

Section: Perceived_usefulnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling customers' intentions to use contactless cards

Polasik

Wisniewski

Lightfoot

2012

IJBAAF

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Since their introduction in the USA in 2002, contactless card payment systems have been widely regarded as the pinnacle of current retail banking technology. However, the potential demand and usage of this innovation has hitherto received little attention from the academic community. Ours is one of the first papers that explore the factors that are likely to govern acceptance and intentions to take-up the technology. The analysis utilises the methodological framework of the technology acceptance model (Davis, 1989;Davis et al., 1989) and develops a range of empirical representations. Our results lend support to the TAM conceptualisation and also indicate that some demographic characteristics imprint upon the intentions of potential users.

show abstract

How people pay: Evidence from grocery store data

Cited by 180 publications

References 15 publications

Choosing and using payment instruments: evidence from German microdata

Choosing and using payment instruments: evidence from German microdata

How Consumers Pay: Adoption and Use of Payments

Modelling customers' intentions to use contactless cards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About