E-Cüzdan Kullanımını Etkileyen Faktörler: Türkiye'de Bir Araştırma

Öz

Günümüzde hızla dijitalleşen dünyada elektronik cüzdan (e-cüzdan) kavramı, geleneksel fiziksel cüzdanların yerini almaya başlamıştır. Bu teknolojik yenilik, kullanıcıların zaman ve mekân sınırlaması olmaksızın dünyanın farklı bölgelerindeki kişi ve işletmelerden ürün veya hizmet satın alabilmelerine olanak tanımaktadır. Teknolojik yeniliklerin benimsenmesini ve kullanıcılar tarafından kabul edilmesini açıklamak amacıyla bugüne kadar çeşitli teorik modeller geliştirilmiş ve sürekli olarak iyileştirilmiştir. Bu modellerin en yaygın kullanılanlarından biri Teknoloji Kabul Modeli (TAM)’dir. Bu çalışmada, e-cüzdan kullanımına ilişkin kullanıcı deneyimi, algılar ve davranışsal niyetler TAM çerçevesi temelinde incelenmiştir. Araştırmaya toplam 330 gönüllü katılımcı dâhil edilmiştir. Katılımcıların internet ortamında e-cüzdan kullanımına yönelik tutum ve deneyimlerini belirlemek amacıyla yapılandırılmış bir anket uygulanmıştır. Anket formunda algılanan fayda, algılanan kullanım kolaylığı, kullanım niyeti, sistem güvenliği, kültürel uyum, sosyal imaj ve sistem kalitesi gibi değişkenler 5’li Likert tipi ölçekle ölçülmüştür. Elde edilen veriler SPSS 23 programı aracılığıyla analiz edilmiş; bulgular betimleyici istatistikler, normallik testi, faktör ve güvenirlik analizleri ile regresyon analizleri kullanılarak raporlanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• E-cüzdan
• Kullanım Niyeti
• Teknoloji Kabul Modeli

Factors Affecting E-Wallet Usage: A Study in Türkiye

Öz

In today’s increasingly digitalized world, the concept of the electronic wallet (e-wallet) is rapidly replacing the traditional physical wallet. This technological transformation enables consumers to conveniently purchase products and services from any person or store around the world, regardless of time and place. Over the years, many theoretical models have been developed and improved to explain the acceptance and adoption of such innovations, starting with the well-known Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). In this study, user experience and behavioral intentions related to e-wallet usage were examined based on the TAM framework. A total of 330 individuals voluntarily participated in the research. A structured questionnaire was administered to the participants to gather their opinions and experiences regarding the use of e-wallets on the internet. In the survey, items about perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, intention to use, system security, cultural congruity, social image, and system quality were measured using a 5-point Likert-type scale. The collected data were analyzed through SPSS 23, and the results were reported using descriptive statistics, normality tests, factor analysis, reliability analysis, and regression analysis.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• E-wallet
• Intention to Use
• Technology Acceptance Model

Kaynakça

1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.
2. Al-Rahmi, A., Shamsuddin, A., Wahab, E., Al-Rahmi, W., Alismaiel, O., & Crawford, J. (2022). Social media usage and acceptance in higher education: a structural equation model. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.964456
3. Altunışık, R., Coşkun, R., Bayraktaroğlu, S., & Yıldırım, E. (2017). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri SPSS uygulamalı. Sakarya: Sakarya Yayıncılık.
4. Altuntaş, C. (2011). Elektronik ticaretin muhasebeleştirilmesi ve vergilendirilmesi sorunları: bir uygulama (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). İstanbul Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
5. Alwi, S., Salleh, M. N. M., Alpandi, R. M., Ya'acob, F. F., & Abdullah, S. M. M. (2021). Fintech as financial inclusion: factors affecting behavioral intention to accept mobile e-wallet during covid-19 outbreak. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(7), 2130-2141. doi: 10.17762/turcomat.v12i7.3356
6. Amron, M. T., Mohamad, M. A., & Noh, N. H. M. (2024). E-Wallet Payment Usage Among Young Consumers Using Technology Continuance Theory. Information Management and Business Review, 16(2 (I) S), 189-197.
7. Baptista, G. & Oliveira, T. (2015). Understanding mobile banking: the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology combined with cultural moderators. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 418-430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.024
8. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Sosyal bilimler için veri analiz el kitabı: istatistik araştırma deseni, SPSS Uygulamaları ve Yorum. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

9. Cahill, T. & Cummings, J. (2023). Effects of congruity on the state of user presence in virtual environments: results from a breaching experiment. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2023.1048812
10. Chellappan, K., Elanchselvan, T., & Abu-Samah, A. (2025). E-wallet Delivery Technology Architecture Adoption: A Review. Jurnal Kejuruteraan, 37(1), 219-232. https://doi.org/10.17576/jkukm-2025-37(1)-14
11. Cheng, H. H., & Huang, S. W. (2013). Exploring antecedents and consequence of online group-buying intention: an extended perspective on theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Information Management, 33(1), 185-198. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.09.003
12. Clark, B. (2001). Electronic wallets: past, present and future. Gpayments. https://www.gpayments.com/Portals/0/pdfs/GPayments_eWallet_Whitepaper.pdf
13. Çölkesen, R., & Kipman, E. (2008). Mobil se-cüzdan mimari tasarımı ve uygulaması. X. Akademik Bilişim Konferansı 2008 (pp. 517-522). Çanakkale: Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi.
14. Daragmeh, A., Sági, J., & Zéman, Z. (2021). Continuous intention to use e-wallet in the context of the covıd-19 pandemic: integrating the Health Belief Model (HBM) and Technology Continuous Theory (TCT). Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 132(7), 1-23. doi: 10.3390/joitmc7020132
15. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. doi: 10.2307/249008
16. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
17. DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten- year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9-30. doi: 10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748
18. Erdem, H. K. (2011). Kurumsal kaynak planlama sistemlerinin kullanımında etkili olan faktörlerin genişletilmiş teknoloji kabul modeli ile incelenmesi (Doktora Tezi). İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi: İstanbul.
19. Evanschitzky, H., Ramaseshan, B., Woisetschläger, D. M., Richelsen, V., Blut, M., & Backhaus, C. (2012). Consequences of customer loyalty to the loyalty program and to the company. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(5), 625-638. doi: 10.1007/s11747-011-0272-3
20. Faizah, S., Dina, L., Kartiko, A., Ma`arif, M., & Hasan, M. (2023). Student acceptance study of PHET simulation with an expanded technology acceptance model approach. Journal of Applied Engineering and Technological Science (JAETS), 5(1), 279-290. https://doi.org/10.37385/jaets.v5i1.3041
21. Fareed, T. (2023). A Systemic Review of Payment Technologies with a Special Focus on Digital Wallets. Financial Technologies and DeFi: A Revisit to the Digital Finance Revolution, 89-97.
22. Gloria, A. M., & Robinson-Kurpius, S. E. (1996). The validation of the cultural congruity scale and the university environment scale with chicano/a students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 18(4), 533-549. doi: 10.1177/0739986396018
23. Güriş, S., & Astar, M. (2014). Bilimsel araştırmalarda SPSS ile istatistik. İstanbul: Der Yayınları.
24. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
25. Jiang, Q., Gu, C., Yan, F., Wei, W., & Tsai, W. (2022). Study on the continuance intention in using virtual shoe- try-on function in mobile online shopping. Kybernetes, 52(10), 4551-4575. https://doi.org/10.1108/k-12-2021- 1346
26. Juniper Research (2022), Digital Wallet Users to Exceed 5.2 Billion Globally by 2026, https://www.juniperresearch.com/press/digital-wallet-users-exceed-5bn-globally-2026/
27. Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayınları.
28. Kandimalla, N. V., & Mari, V. (2020). Digital wallet payments (Doctoral Dissertation). Politecnico Milano, Italy.
29. Kavut, S. (2023). Türkiye’de dijital kimlik ve dijital gözetim üzerine bir değerlendirme. Dijital Çağda Medya, 67.
30. Kılıç, S. (2013). Doğrusal regresyon analizi. Journal of Mood Disorders, 3(2), 90-93. doi: 10.5455/jmood.20130624120840
31. Kwahk, K. Y., & Lee, J. N. (2008). The role of readiness for change in ERP implementation: theoretical bases and empirical validation. Information and Management, 45(7), 474-481. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2008.07.002
32. Lu, J., Yao, J. E., & Yu, C. S. (2005). Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless internet services via mobile technology. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14(3), 245-268.
33. Malhotra, N. K. (2010). Marketing research: an applied orientation. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
34. Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222. doi: 10.1287/isre.2.3.192
35. Nochai, R., & Nochai, T. (2013). The impact of internet banking service on customer satisfaction in Thailand: a case study in Bangkok. International Journal of Humanities and Management Sciences, 1(1), 1001-105.
36. Olsen, M., Hedman, J., & Vatrapu, R. (2011). E-wallet properties. 10th International Conference on Mobile Business (pp. 158-165). Como, Italy: IEEE.
37. 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, 1(22), 17-24.
38. Prawira, F. R., Prakoso, N. T., Handayani, P. W., & Harahap, N. C. (2024). The influence of information security factors on the continuance use of electronic wallet. Procedia Computer Science, 234, 1467-1475.
39. Rahman, H. and Hidayat, R. (2019). Influencing factors in the depth-usage of social media as the business platform by student entrepreneurs. Amar (Andalas Management Review), 3(1), 19-54. https://doi.org/10.25077/amar.3.1.19-54.2019
40. Renaud, K., & van Biljon, J. (2008). Predicting technology acceptance and adoption by the elderly: a qualitative study. The 2008 annual research conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists (pp. 210-219). Wilderness, South Africa.
41. Rogers, E. M. (1962, 1983). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
42. Salodkar, A., Morey, K., & Shirbhate, M. (2015). Electronic wallet. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, 2(9), 975-977.
43. Shetu, S. N., Islam, M. M., & Promi, S. I. (2022). An empirical investigation of the continued usage intention of digital wallets: The moderating role of perceived technological innovativeness. Future Business Journal, 8(1), 43.
44. Singh, S., & Ghatak, S. (2021). Investigating e-wallet adoption in India: extending the TAM model. International Journal of E-Business Research, 3(17), 42-54. doi: 10.4018/IJEBR.2021070103
45. Sipahi, B., Yurtkoru, E. S., & Çinko, M. (2010). Sosyal bilimlerde SPSS’le veri analizi. İstanbul: Beta Yayıncılık.
46. Sukendro, S., Habibi, A., Khaeruddin, K., Indrayana, B., Syahruddin, S., Makadada, F., A. & Hakim, H. (2020). Using an extended technology acceptance model to understand students’ use of e-learning during covid- 19: indonesian sport science education context. Heliyon, 6(11), e05410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05410
47. Tombaş, H., & Çelik, A. A. (2022). Genç tüketicilerin elektronik ödeme yöntemi kullanımlarının belirleyicilerine dair alan araştırması. Abant Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 22(1), 47-63.
48. Uddin, M. S., & Akhi, A. Y. (2014). E-wallet system for Bangladesh an electronic payment system. International Journal of Modeling and Optimization, 3(4), 216-219.
49. Upadhayaya, A. (2012). Electronic commerce and e-wallet. International Journal of Recent Research and Review, 1(1), 37-41.
50. Uysal, F. M. (2023). Dijital Cüzdan: Güvenli ve Maliyet Etkin Bir Altyapı Yaklaşımı. Orclever Proceedings of Research and Development, 3(1), 490-501.
51. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273-315. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
52. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. doi: 10.2307/30036540
53. Warshaw, P. R., & Davis, F. (1985). Disentangling behavioral intention and behavioral expectation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21(3), 213-228. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(85)90017-4
54. Wibisono, N., Rafdinal, W., & Setiawati, L. (2024). Tourism in the virtual age: predicting the adoption of virtual reality applications in tourism. International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events, 8(1), 9-23. https://doi.org/10.31940/ijaste.v8i1.9-23
55. Wu, J. H., & Wang, S. C. (2005). What drives mobile commerce? an empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42(5), 719-729. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2004.07.001
56. Zaid, M. (2024). The effect of revisiting technology acceptance model on the behavioral targeting declaration. Journal Dimensie Management and Public Sector, 5(1), 45-61. https://doi.org/10.48173/jdmps.v5i1.260
57. Zaineldeen, S., Li, H., Koffi, A., & Hassan, B. (2020). Technology acceptance model concepts, contribution, limitation, and adoption in education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(11), 5061-5071. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081106