The contribution of government policy and financial security control in Ghana’s mobile money services

Figures & data

Figure 1. The study model with constructs.

Table 1. Summary of study hypothesis

H01: Users’ Attitudes toward mobile money affect one’s Behavioural Intention. H02: Behavioural Intention have a significant impact on the Actual Use of mobile money H03: Government Policy has an influence on users’ Attitudes toward mobile money service H04: There is a significant impact of Government policy on users’ Behavioural Intention H06: There is a significant impact of government policy on Perceived usefulness H05: There is a significant impact of Government policy on perceived ease of use H07: There is a significant impact of Perceived ease of use on behavioural intention H08: There is a significant impact of Perceived ease of use on perceived usefulness H09: Perceived usefulness have a positive impact on users’ behavioural intention H010: There is a significant impact of Financial Security Control on users’ Attitudes H011: There is a significant impact of Financial Security Control on Behavioural Intention H012: Financial Security Control have a positive impact on Perceived Ease of Use H013: Financial Security Control have a positive impact on Perceived Usefulness.

A summary of the study hypothesis is shown in Table 1, this is used in the design of the model for the analysis.

Table 2. Respondent demographic details

Variable (n = 2041)		Frequency	Percentage(%)
Gender	Male	959	47.0
	Female	1082	53.0
Age	18–28 years	451	22.1
	29–38 years	712	34.9
	39–48 years	422	20.7
	49–58 years	302	14.8
	59 years and above	154	7.5
Occupation	Schooling	214	10.5
	Household work	441	21.6
	Employed	881	43.2
	Unemployed	409	20.0
	Retirement	96	4.7
Academic	No formal education	461	22.6
	High school	251	12.3
	Certificate	115	5.6
	Diploma	447	21.9
	Bachelor’s degree	669	32.8
	Master’s degree	98	4.8

Table 3. Convergent reliability

	Factor Loading	Cronbach’s Alpha	rho_A	Composite Reliability	Average Variance Extracted (AVE)
ATT1	0.899
ATT2	0.914	0.898	0.899	0.926	0.715
ATT4	0.886
ATT5	0.774
ATT6	0.739
BIU1	0.907	0.776	0.776	0.899	0.817
BIU2	0.901
GVP1	0.892
GVP2	0.892
GVP3	0.944	0.899	0.945	0.935	0.827
PEOU1	0.765
PEOU2	0.782
PEOU3	0.825
PEOU4	0.720	0.835	0.839	0.883	0.603
PEOU5	0.786
PEU1	0.782
PEU2	0.777
PEU3	0.824	0.836	0.838	0.884	0.604
PEU4	0.727
PEU5	0.774
UFS1	0.948
UFS2	0.855	0.936	0.970	0.953	0.835
UFS3	0.931
UFS4	0.919

Note: ATT = Attitude of user; BIU = Behavioural intention to use; GOV = Government policy; PEOU =Perceived ease of use; PEU = Perceived usefulness; UFS = Use of financial security control; USE =Actual use

Table 4. Fornell-larcker criterion

	ATT	BIU	GOV	PEOU	PEU	USE	USF
ATT	0.846
BIU	0.076	0.904
GOV	0.767	−0.318	0.909
PEOU	0.631	0.095	0.568	0.776
PEU	0.625	0.109	0.555	0.699	0.777
USE	−0.240	−0.112	−0.219	0.029	0.030	1.000
USF	0.658	0.165	0.595	0.492	0.490	−0.198	0.914

Note: The bold values are the score root of AVE

Table 5. Heterotrait-monotrait correlation ratio

	ATT	BIU	GOV	PEOU	PEU	USE	USF
ATT
BIU	0.226
GOV	0.833	0.393
PEOU	0.717	0.267	0.598
PEU	0.718	0.266	0.597	1.197
USE	0.256	0.128	0.234	0.669	0.072
USF	0.807	0.230	0.576	0.511	0.512	0.201

Table 6. Endogenous construct validity using ${\mathrm{R}}^2$ and ${\mathrm{Q}}^2$

	R^2	Q^2
ATT	0.838	0.587
BIU	0.407	0.330
PEOU	0.359	0.211
PEU	0.999	0.600
USE	0.013	0.012

Table 7. Direct relationship results

Hypothesis Path	ß	STDEV	T-Statistics	P Values	Results
H01: ATT -> BIU	0.485	0.028	17.500	0.000	Supported
H02: BIU -> USE	−0.112	0.022	5.001	0.000	Supported
H03: GOV -> ATT	0.397	0.009	42.143	0.000	Supported
H04: GOV -> BIU	−0.841	0.029	29.328	0.000	Supported
H05: GOV -> PEOU	0.426	0.018	24.016	0.000	Supported
H06: GOV -> PEU	−0.022	0.002	11.469	0.000	Supported
H07: PEOU -> BIU	−3.973	1.137	3.494	0.000	Supported
H08: PEOU -> PEU	1.008	0.001	1108.423	0.000	Supported
H09: PEU -> BIU	4.163	1.130	3.683	0.000	Supported
H010: USF -> ATT	0.622	0.011	55.641	0.000	Supported
H011: USF -> BIU	0.164	0.022	7.336	0.000	Supported
H012: USF -> PEOU	0.239	0.013	18.970	0.000	Supported
H013: USF -> PEU	0.007	0.001	5.346	0.000	Supported

Figure 2. Structural model result.

Figure 3. Hypothesis results.