Transaction size effects on consumers' retail payment mode choice

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine how the monetary value of a retail transaction (transaction size) impacts consumers' preferences for cash, debit and credit card payment modes. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on the analytical and empirical literature on retail payment mode choice and the related literature on differences in payment mode attributes, the author develops and tests a hypothesis that at retail point of purchase, cash, debit and credit card will be preferred payment modes for low‐, medium‐ and high‐value transactions, respectively. The hypothesis is tested in an experimental survey in which a sample of 477 respondents indicate which payment mode they would most likely use for each of ten products that vary systematically in list prices. Findings The results offer broad support for the hypothesis. They also show that preferences for debit and credit card payment modes are similar at low transaction values (both are less preferred), whilst those for debit and cash payment are similar at large transaction values (again, both are less preferred). This suggests that electronic payment modes are collectively a substitute for cash for low transaction values, whilst credit cards are a substitute for cash and debit cards for high transaction values. Research limitations/implications A key implication of the results is that it may be possible to persuade consumers in the study context to use electronic payments for small‐value transactions by invoking and making salient, convenience considerations that are purported to drive preferences for cash payment for such purchases. Originality/value The results also offer an alternative explanation for the continuing dominance of cash transactions in modern economies, and outlines implications for promoting consumer use of electronic payment modes at retail point of purchase.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 17 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.