Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda

Research trends in mobile payment adoption:... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358" }, "headline": "Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda", "datePublished": "2025-03-31T09:26:02", "dateModified": "2025-08-20T15:22:19", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Alejandro Valencia-Arias" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Jesus Alberto Jimenez Garcia" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Gustavo Moreno-López" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Aaron José Alberto Oré León" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Lucia Palacios-Moya" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Jackeline Valencia" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Martha Benjumea-Arias" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": "This study explores the adoption of mobile payments as a research field to understand the technological, socioeconomic, and cultural factors that influence the understanding of the users’ experience and satisfaction and attract more users. It is vital to examine the research trends in the adoption of mobile payments from a systematic literature review using PRISMA 2020 to select 63 documents from Scopus and WOS. Among the results, the most used models for this analysis are extended TAM and extended UTAUT. The most representative variables in the studies are social influence, security perception, risk perception, trust and perceived usefulness. It is concluded that the future research agenda should focus on topics such as biometric authentication, payment flexibility and contactless payments. In addition, from the business perspective, there is a focus on designing innovative interfaces that are more intuitive for users." } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358", "name": "Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda" } } ] } Home Browse Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Valencia-Arias A, Jimenez Garcia JA, Moreno-López G et al. Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.159551.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Systematic Review Revised Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] Alejandro Valencia-Arias https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9434-6923 1 , Jesus Alberto Jimenez Garcia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0722-8484 2 , Gustavo Moreno-López 3 , [...] Aaron José Alberto Oré León 4 , Lucia Palacios-Moya 5 , Jackeline Valencia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6524-9577 4,6 , Martha Benjumea-Arias 7 Alejandro Valencia-Arias https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9434-6923 1 , Jesus Alberto Jimenez Garcia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0722-8484 2 , [...] Gustavo Moreno-López 3 , Aaron José Alberto Oré León 4 , Lucia Palacios-Moya 5 , Jackeline Valencia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6524-9577 4,6 , Martha Benjumea-Arias 7 PUBLISHED 20 Aug 2025 Author details Author details 1 School of Industrial Engineering, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, Lambayeque, 14001, Peru 2 Dirección de Planificación y Desarrollo Institucional, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, Lambayeque, 14001, Peru 3 Rectoría, Institucion Universitaria Marco Fidel Suarez, Medellín, Antioquia, 50030, Colombia 4 Instituto de Investigación y Estudios de la Mujer, Universidad Ricardo Palma, Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru 5 Escuela de posgrado, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, Lambayeque, Peru 6 Vicerrectoría de Investigación y Postgrado, Universidad de Los Lagos, Osorno, 5290000, Chile 7 Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Administrativas, Instituto Tecnologico Metropolitano, Medellín, Antioquia, 050034, Colombia Alejandro Valencia-Arias Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Jesus Alberto Jimenez Garcia Roles: Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Software, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Gustavo Moreno-López Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Aaron José Alberto Oré León Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Lucia Palacios-Moya Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Jackeline Valencia Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Martha Benjumea-Arias Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Methodology, Resources, Software, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract This study explores the adoption of mobile payments as a research field to understand the technological, socioeconomic, and cultural factors that influence the understanding of the users’ experience and satisfaction and attract more users. It is vital to examine the research trends in the adoption of mobile payments from a systematic literature review using PRISMA 2020 to select 63 documents from Scopus and WOS. Among the results, the most used models for this analysis are extended TAM and extended UTAUT. The most representative variables in the studies are social influence, security perception, risk perception, trust and perceived usefulness. It is concluded that the future research agenda should focus on topics such as biometric authentication, payment flexibility and contactless payments. In addition, from the business perspective, there is a focus on designing innovative interfaces that are more intuitive for users. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Mobile banking, electronic payments, Digital payments, Technology acceptance, PRISMA. Corresponding Author(s) Alejandro Valencia-Arias ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Alejandro Valencia-Arias Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2025 Valencia-Arias A et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Valencia-Arias A, Jimenez Garcia JA, Moreno-López G et al. Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.159551.2 ) First published: 31 Mar 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.159551.1 ) Latest published: 20 Aug 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.159551.2 ) Revised Amendments from Version 1 This revised version of the article addresses several important points raised during the review process to enhance methodological clarity, scientific rigor, and analytical transparency. First, the exact dates of the database searches in Scopus and Web of Science were added to ensure consistency and reproducibility of the bibliometric analysis. Second, the introduction section was thoroughly revised with the inclusion of updated scholarly references to support key claims and reinforce the scientific foundation of the paper. Third, a clearer mapping between the analytical tools (Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace) and their respective functions was provided, alongside specific clarifications about the analyses depicted in Figures 7 and 8. Fourth, the PRISMA flow diagram was improved with the addition of explanatory notes detailing the criteria for "report not retrievable" and "record excluded," contributing to greater transparency in the selection process. Finally, two real-world examples of successful mobile payment systems were incorporated into the discussion section to enrich the theoretical reflections with practical insights. These updates significantly strengthen the overall quality and academic robustness of the manuscript. This revised version of the article addresses several important points raised during the review process to enhance methodological clarity, scientific rigor, and analytical transparency. First, the exact dates of the database searches in Scopus and Web of Science were added to ensure consistency and reproducibility of the bibliometric analysis. Second, the introduction section was thoroughly revised with the inclusion of updated scholarly references to support key claims and reinforce the scientific foundation of the paper. Third, a clearer mapping between the analytical tools (Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace) and their respective functions was provided, alongside specific clarifications about the analyses depicted in Figures 7 and 8. Fourth, the PRISMA flow diagram was improved with the addition of explanatory notes detailing the criteria for "report not retrievable" and "record excluded," contributing to greater transparency in the selection process. Finally, two real-world examples of successful mobile payment systems were incorporated into the discussion section to enrich the theoretical reflections with practical insights. These updates significantly strengthen the overall quality and academic robustness of the manuscript. See the authors' detailed response to the review by Ni Made Estiyanti See the authors' detailed response to the review by Wahyu Hidayat READ REVIEWER RESPONSES Introduction In recent years, digitization has permeated an increasing number of aspects of the current social configuration, making it possible to prominently position tools such as mobile payments, which have been increasingly positioned as a convenient and safe way to carry out financial transactions (Bojjagani et al., 2021; Anwar et al., 2024 ; Alkadi & Abed, 2023 ). In this sense, authors such as Bojjagani et al. (2023) explain that mobile payments refer to the use of mobile devices, such as smartphones or tablets, to carry out financial transactions, including money transfers, online purchases and payments or bill payments, which has allowed us to observe an increasingly greater increase in scientific production around the understanding of the factors that influence the adoption of this technology ( Talwar et al., 2020 ; Zhang & Kim, 2023 ). In this sense, one of the main discussion factors around the adoption of mobile payments has been the initial trust that influences both the understanding of adoption and the intention to continue using mobile payments, according to authors such as Talwar et al. (2020) . In addition, this technology has been largely prevalent in the pandemic and post pandemic period due to COVID-19 ( George & Sunny, 2022 ; ThePaypers, 2021), which is why frameworks have been proposed that integrate the main models that allow increasing the levels of knowledge around the adoption of this technology to this specific historical moment, as well as other more specific variants that have unified models to understand the adoption of disruptive technologies in the service sector ( Schmidthuber et al., 2020 ), or in specific contexts, such as Gupta and Arora (2020) , who analyzed the intention of Indian consumers to adopt mobile payment systems. Other authors, such as Kalinić et al. (2020) , have shown that the understanding of the factors that affect the adoption of mobile payments not only is conditioned by factors of technology but, on the contrary, is essential to understand variables associated with socioeconomic and cultural aspects when studying the moderating impact of gender on the acceptance of mobile payment systems, finding that men report a greater probability of adopting these systems than women. Similarly, Hasan et al. (2024) found that among younger generations, trust and compatibility are more decisive than perceived enjoyment in the adoption of mobile payments. The adoption of mobile payments has been highly influenced in recent years by smartphones’ growing role in the lives of consumers, which is consistent with the increase in demand for digital financial services. In this sense, companies have begun to invest increasingly in the development of mobile payment platforms in such a way that they can take advantage of all the opportunities offered by this type of payment system ( Kawamoto et al., 2023 ; ABI Research, 2022 ). In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the transition to digital payments, which has generated greater interest in this topic ( George & Sunny, 2022 ). Based on the above, other authors have highlighted the current importance of recognizing and exploring all the challenges and opportunities derived from the growth of the adoption of mobile payment platforms from multiple perspectives, such as business models ( Jocevski et al., 2020 ), awakening in organizations a recognition of the importance of specific strategies and solutions, such as mobile wallets, mentioned by Mombeuil (2020) , which have been important for all those companies that seek to improve elements associated with the user experience and, with this, significantly increase their customer or consumer base. Likewise, in business terms, authors such as Verma et al. (2020) speak of the importance of considering all the elements associated with government regulations so that organizations can focus on the aspects properly associated with the adoption or intention to continue using this type of service ( Kawamoto et al., 2023 ). In terms of the adoption of mobile payments, it is essential to analyze the behavior of use of this type of system in specific populations, not only from the geographical point of view but also from the demographic point of view, as evidenced in ( Wei et al., 2021 ), where organizations speak of the importance of understanding these factors from the young generation, which has been complemented by Karimi and Liu (2020) , which, in addition, expand on the need to study the differential impact of the mood of this type of consumer, as well as that mentioned by Teng and Khong (2021) on the opportunity to take advantage of emerging technologies such as Big Data, which provide fundamental information in terms of consumer segmentation, understanding their diversity in the use of this type of system. However, although the adoption of mobile payments is positioned as a relevant issue and, in that sense, it is currently booming as a result of the development of new mobile technologies, there are still several important research gaps due to the lack of complete review studies that unify the current state of knowledge of the subject, as well as its specificities, such as the understanding of some psychobehavioural or cultural elements ( Wasil et al., 2020 ), the incidence of consumer behavior in terms of adoption of mobile payments ( Flavian et al., 2020 ), or how the adoption of these systems occurs in the post pandemic context in other specific societies ( Rafdinal & Senalasari, 2021 ). Therefore, it is necessary to carry out a systematic review of the literature (SRL) to identify the primary studies and their characteristics and therefore to guide future research agendas. In this sense, this article aims to explore the scientific literature on mobile payment adoption in order to guide future research. To achieve this, the following broad and specific research objectives are proposed: RO1: Identify and analyze bibliometric trends in the adoption of mobile payments. RO2: Investigate the evolution of the main keywords for analysis in the scientific literature on the adoption of mobile payments. RO3: Evaluate the theories used by researchers to determine the adoption of mobile payments. RO4: Analyze the main variables used to understand the adoption of mobile payments. RO5: Identify research gaps in the literature on mobile payment adoption and propose future research questions based on these gaps. RO6: Design a research agenda that integrates identified gaps and growing and emerging research topics on mobile payments adoption. This article consists of an introductory section, where the definition, importance and problems associated with the adoption of mobile payments are analyzed. The methodological section follows, where the parameters through which the systematic literature review will be developed are defined, as well as the results associated with the research and discussion of these, where research gaps are raised, and the design of a research agenda. Finally, a conclusion on the main aspects is presented. Methods Once the research objective has been identified, an exploratory search is designed that proposes a bibliometric analysis, which facilitates the evaluation of the scientific publications found in the literature. The bibliometric analysis favors the discovery of emerging trends in the production of the authors, the journals, as well as collaboration patterns and research components ( Donthu et al., 2021 ). The search in the Scopus and Web of Science databases was carried out simultaneously on February 5, 2023, ensuring consistency in the data collected. Additionally, to enhance the elements of detail and replication, a bibliographic review process was carried out, taking as a reference the international PRISMA 2020 statement, which defines the eligibility criteria, sources of information, search strategy and data management to be executed on the selected data sources, as evidenced in Page et al. (2021) and specified in Valencia-Arias et al. (2023) . Inclusion and exclusion criteria For the present research, the eligibility criteria used for the selection of articles are divided into inclusion and exclusion criteria based on the international PRISMA 2020 statement, being that in the case of the inclusion criteria of this research on the adoption of mobile payments, concepts such as adoption, technology, mobile and payment are found in both the title and keywords of the publications to be analyzed, thus guaranteeing that the publications found are relevant for this research. For the exclusion criteria, three consecutive complex selection phases were defined based on the international PRISMA 2020 statement. In the first phase, documents with incorrect indexing are excluded, starting from reading the titles of the selected documents. For the second phase, those articles whose full text is unavailable are discarded; however, this element does not apply to bibliometric analysis. Since metadata analysis is used, the aforementioned is designed explicitly for systematic literature reviews, where the full text is analyzed. Finally, for the third and last phase, all those documents derived from conference proceedings are eliminated, including those considered irrelevant that may limit the analysis that allows the fulfilment of the objective to be fully achieved. Information sources and search strategy For the search for scientific and academic information related to the acceptance of mobile payments, Web of Science and Scopus were selected. They are the most widely used databases in analysis processes and scientific evaluation because they are multidisciplinary bases that cover many journals and offer resources that are very helpful for re-searchers ( Codina et al., 2020 ). For correct execution of the search in the databases, the international PRISMA 2020 statement was considered, which mentions the importance of defining the inclusion criteria and the keywords. For this reason, two different search equations are defined, which change according to the database interface, thus ensuring that all the keywords are found in the documents that yield the search results. As mentioned above, the search equations are as follows: ((TITLE ( “Adoption” OR “acceptance” OR tam OR “Technolog* acceptance model” OR tpb OR “Theory of Planned Behav*”) AND TITLE ((mobile) AND ( pay* OR compensation OR remittance OR remuneration OR deposit))) OR (KEY (“Adoption” OR “acceptance” OR tam OR “Technolog* ac-ceptance model” OR tpb OR “Theory of Planned Behav*”) AND KEY (mobile AND (pay* OR com-pensation OR remittance OR remuneration OR deposit)))) ((TI= (“Adoption” OR “acceptance” OR tam OR “Technolog* acceptance model” OR tpb OR “Theory of Planned Behav*”) AND TI= (mobile AND (pay* OR compensation OR remittance OR remuneration OR deposit))) OR (AK= (“Adoption” OR “acceptance” OR tam OR “Technolog* acceptance model” OR tpb OR “Theory of Planned Behav*”) AND AK= (mobile AND (pay* OR compensation OR remittance OR remuneration OR deposit)))) Data management Initially, the search yielded 721 results, of which 204 belong to Web of Science and 517 to Scopus. These results range from the first publication in 2004 to the current year, 2023. The articles obtained were processed with the help of Microsoft Excel ® tools and VOS viewer. With the first tool, the data were stored, and the exclusion criteria defined above were applied. Finally, 63 publications were analyzed. In addition, with the help of the second tool, the graphs of bibliometric indicators were generated to facilitate data analysis. Selection process To reduce the bias of the information found in this research, the articles were independently chosen by the authors, as evidenced by the PRISMA 2020 statement, to conduct an exhaustive review of the selection and analysis of the publications. Additionally, to resolve the differences found in each exclusion process, a detailed analysis was carried out that allowed us to identify similarities or convergences in the selected articles. Finally, Figure 1 summarizes the methodological design used, which is represented using a flow diagram as established by the international PRISMA statement. Figure 1. Flowchart for PRISMA systematic literature reviews. Alt text Figure 1 . Flowchart illustrating the PRISMA systematic literature review process. Report not retrievable (n = 305): Articles whose full texts were not accessible in the databases, had indexing errors, or were not open access. Records excluded (n = 167): Documents excluded after reviewing titles, abstracts, and publication type (e.g., proceedings, editorials, or articles irrelevant to the topic of mobile payment adoption). The diagram in Figure 1 allows us to follow the step-by-step identification of the articles, starting with the search in each of the databases, where the formulated search equation was used, proceeding with the elimination of duplicate articles, to later continue with the exclusion phases, to finally find the number of articles that will be applied to the metadata analysis. Effective bibliometric review To enhance the quality and methodological transparency of this bibliometric analysis on the adoption of mobile payments, it is recommended to include a reference or detailed guide on how to conduct an effective bibliometric review. This should incorporate examples of relevant studies that illustrate best practices in this field, as demonstrated in Chauhan and Yadav (2024) and Agarwal et al. (2023) . This sentence is already well-written and meets the desired characteristics. No changes are necessary. Results This section presents the findings that respond to the objective of exploring the scientific literature on the adoption of mobile payments to guide a research agenda for the development of future research and to the research questions formulated: a) What are the bibliometric trends on the adoption of mobile payments? b) What is the evolution of the main keywords for analysis in the scientific literature on mobile payment adoption? c) What theories are used by researchers to determine the adoption of mobile payments? d) What are the main variables used to understand the adoption of mobile payments? e) What research gaps are identified in the mobile payment adoption literature, and what future research questions can be asked? f ) What elements should a research agenda have that integrate the identified gaps and the growing and emerging research themes on the adoption of mobile payments? This gives way to the estimation of bibliometric indicators for identifying the adoption factors of mobile payments. For this, research trends were analyzed by studying the behavior dynamics of authors, journals and countries, the evolution of the subject, the keywords, and the use of theories and variables that characterize technology adoption from the thematic component. To ensure methodological transparency and reproducibility, the tools used and the analyses performed are specified as follows. Microsoft Excel was used for storing, cleaning, and organizing the bibliometric data, as well as generating visualizations that show the temporal evolution of key concepts and the frequency of relevant terms. VOSviewer, on the other hand, was employed to create co-occurrence maps of keywords and thematic clustering analyses, allowing the identification of conceptual relationships among terms and the structure of the scientific production in the studied field. It is important to note that all visualizations were generated exclusively with these tools, and no additional software such as CiteSpace was used. Bibliometric aspects of research on mobile payment adoption factors The analysis of these bibliometric indicators was estimated from the 412 studies before eliminating the documents that did not have access to the full text. Exponential growth in publications per year is shown as the years go by, as seen in Figure 2 , making evident the use of the subject and the growing interest in adopting mobile payments. These studies range from 2004 to 2023; the most relevant years are 2021 and 2022. The year 2022 has the most publications, with a total of 75, where the objective is to analyze the influence of the dimensions of quality and confirmation on the continuation intentions of users to use electronic wallet applications. These dimensions are usefulness, ease of use and security, which play an important role in the decision-making by users to continue using electronic wallets ( Abbasi et al., 2022 ). Figure 2. Publications by year. Alt text Figure 2 . Graph depicting the number of publications over the years. Subsequently, in 2021, there are 63 publications. The research focuses on the type of mobile payment that uses QR code since the acceptance of mobile payment still has potential for improvement, for which this study seeks to establish the critical antecedents that influence the intention of adopting mobile payments, specifically in the type of mobile payment that uses the QR code technology, through an extended mobile technology acceptance model, this is provided with numerous practical implications, Because the results may not coincide precisely with the adoption of mobile payment with QR code in all countries, as there are significant differences between them. These differences could be either in their culture, ethnicity, or economic development, among others, that probably influence the adoption of this technology ( Yan et al., 2021 ). In Figure 3 , the main authors are identified in terms of productivity and impact in the scientific literature on the adoption of mobile payments, evidencing the author Liébana-Cabanillas F as the primary research reference by positioning himself as the author who publishes the most, with 16 articles and, in addition, the most cited, with a total of 1400 citations, and that, meanwhile, accounts for articles that analyze the acceptance of mobile payments by users, accounting for factors such as external influence, ease of use, attitude, usefulness, confidence, risk and age, the latter being a significant factor in terms of adoption (F. J. Liébana-Cabanillas et al., 2014 ). Likewise, other studies account for the intention to adopt specific systems such as Apple Pay, understanding that today’s society is transitioning to cashless systems (F. J. Liébana-Cabanillas et al., 2020 ). Figure 3. Authors with the highest number of citations and publications. Alt text Figure 3 . Chart showing authors with the highest number of citations and publications. Among the main references are also the authors Muñoz-Leiva F., with eight publications and 900 citations associated with their scientific activity. In addition, it is known that these authors have collaborated with Liébana-Cabanillas in one of the main articles in the scientific field, through which an attempt is made to identify the role of the user’s gender in terms of acceptance of mobile payments, concluding that by providing alternatives and segmentation strategies, this new business opportunity can be consolidated under new technological developments (F. J. Liébana-Cabanillas et al., 2014 ). On the other hand, there is the author Dwivedi YK with nine publications and 664 citations in his scientific production on the adoption of mobile payments, which is evidenced in his research on how mobile payments would be one of the most successful mobile services in the future. However, his work also shows that until that date, a limited acceptance had been achieved in developed countries, finding that social influence, performance expectation, perceived risk and innovation significantly influenced the intentions to adopt this method ( Slade et al., 2015 ). On the other hand, he shows how digital payments have great potential for millions of people in developing countries by offering financial services to users who are not banked, showing that the expectation of performance and the perceived useful-ness are key to the behavior of the consumer when using mobile payments and that the perceived risk keeps them from using it ( P. P. Patil et al., 2017 ). Likewise, Figure 4 shows the results of the literature review to identify the main scientific journals in terms of dis-semination of articles on the adoption of mobile payments, identifying that the journal Computers in Human Behavior, with a total of 10 publications and more than 2,900 citations, is positioned as the leading magazine in the field. This journal reports articles that study the limitations that exist in the rapid adoption by users of mobile payment services since, despite the advantages offered by this system, adoption has been slow in order for these to be accepted more easily and can continue to prosper, tangible benefits must be provided to the consumer. This can be achieved through links with other projects, such as discounts, loyalty and others that appear along the way ( Johnson et al., 2018 ). Figure 4. Magazines with the highest number of citations and publications. Alt text Figure 4 . Chart displaying magazines with the highest number of citations and publications. Another of the main magazines in the scientific field is the Journal Of Retailing And Consumer Services, which has published a total of 12 articles on the subject and with a total of 977 citations, with the main article analyzing the adoption by consumers of proximity mobile payment technology, identifying variables such as perceived value, usefulness, hedonic and social benefits, as well as drivers such as financial and privacy risks that influence adoption ( de Kerviler et al., 2016 ). Other studies, such as[4], have investigated the role of information and service quality in terms of initial trust in mobile payments and how this affects perceived usefulness and adoption. Another important journal in the scientific literature is Technological Forecasting And Social Change, which accounts for 13 publications and 527 accumulated citations. In some studies that address the specific characteristics that allow us to understand how technology impacts the intention to use mobile payments, despite the high rate of mobile phones that currently exist and the considerable investments that service providers make in obtaining new technologies, the results of this study reveal that the intention to use these services is seen as highly affected by useful-ness, compatibility, innovation, social media, and perceived social influence but is also affected by perceived risk ( Schmidthuber et al., 2020 ). Figure 5 analyses the most prolific countries with the greatest impact on the subject. In global terms, it is evident that the United States is the leading country in research on the adoption factors of mobile payments, being the most productive, with a total of 51 articles on this research field, having research that focuses on factors such as innovation and social influence in terms of adoption ( Oliveira et al., 2016 ). Consequently, it is the country with the most cited articles, with a total of 4056 accumulated citations, accounting for important articles that also study the role of social applications in the attitudes and behaviors of consumers and their incidence the adoption of mobile payments ( Andronie et al., 2021 ). Figure 5. Countries with the highest number of citations and publications. Alt text Figure 5 . Map or chart indicating countries with the highest number of citations and publications. India has the second-most cited articles, with 45 publications and 1439 citations; one of these investigations identifies the determinants of satisfaction with the use of mobile payments that could improve the adoption of this service, highlighting factors such as cost, usefulness, trust, social influence, credibility, information privacy and responsiveness, and how these drive mobile payment service experiences and affect user satisfaction, all based on data taken of the social network Twitter, mentioning that, according to these findings, service providers should try to minimize the cost of transactions, since if addressed correctly, this could have a positive impact during said mobile payments between parties. Another of the reference countries is Spain, which, although not among the most productive in the scientific field, is in the second position of impact, with a total of 1750 citations, in important articles where it is evidenced by how the age of potential mobile payment users can generate possible moderating effects on the adoption of this system, since the suggested behavior pattern has an adequate adjustment, evidencing that depending on the age of the users, considerable differences are caused in the proposal between ease of use and trust, the latter concerning ease of use and the attitude that each person has towards its use. Conceptual components Following the analysis of the research and academic production on the subject, this section raises the analysis of thematic components with the idea of studying the research evolution around the most frequent key concepts in the literature, such as trend analysis and identification of emerging words of greater relevance to the object of study. Thus, Figure 6 shows an analysis of the evolution of academic production on mobile payment adoption factors, where the main concepts are highlighted by year, including from the year of the first publication on the subject (2004). Hence, in the first place, trust is postulated as the most relevant term and trend for 2023, in addition to being a term that has been repeated in the literature during 2014 and 2015. Trust has been analyzed in the literature as a key factor in consumers conducting business transactions online or participating in e-commerce and internet banking processes. This factor has been defined as the expectation that other users fulfil their promises and obligations in the transactional exchange relationship ( Yang et al., 2023 ). Confidence has been verified in various studies as the determining factor or predictor of the intention to adopt mobile applications to make online purchases [35], ( Yang et al., 2023 ). Figure 6. Concept evolution. Alt text Figure 6 . Diagram illustrating the concept evolution of the subject. At the same time, the frequency of perceived risk increased, standing out in the literature during 2012, 2021, and 2022. The publication [36] has argued the importance of analyzing the risk under the psychological behavior of users of virtual and online purchases, who associate this emotion with uncertainty due to the possibility of economic losses in transactions mediated by the internet. During the last decade, the evolution of mobile payment studies has changed according to technological advances in the economic sectors. In that period, factors such as social influence predominated in the literature, characterized in part by human relations, the internet, social networks and the perception of the use of technology that the social reference group has of the potential use of mobile payments, such as relatives, friends, colleagues ( Wei et al., 2021 ); fintech, the development of technological applications in finance that has increased access to various banking services in digital media ( Hassan et al., 2019 ). Technological advances have also been combined with theories that study the behavior of the individual against the intention of use and the theory of reasoned action in making decisions to adopt digital platforms to make payments for products and services, whose application by parts of companies is to attract and retain their customers ( Ariffin & Lim, 2020 ; F. Liébana-Cabanillas, Molinillo, et al., 2020 ). In terms of the frequency and validity with which the keywords above are applied according to the adoption of mobile payments, as shown in Figure 7 , from the graph of a Cartesian plane, four different quadrants are identified, which reflect the concepts with a higher level of appearance and at the same time have decreased in importance today associated with the topic of interest. Figure 7. Validity and frequency of keywords. Alt text Figure 7 . Graph representing the validity and frequency of keywords in the dataset. Figure 7 presents a strategic diagram that classifies keywords related to mobile payment adoption based on two key dimensions: frequency (horizontal axis) and recency (vertical axis), which are used to identify thematic trends over time. Quadrant I (Upper Left – Less Frequent, More Current): Contains emerging or novel themes that have appeared more recently but have not yet been widely explored. Keywords such as “Covid-19”, “Continuance Intention”, “Apple Pay” and “India” suggest new areas of research that are gaining attention but are still developing in terms of frequency. Quadrant II (Upper Right – More Frequent, More Current): This quadrant represents motor themes—topics that are both frequent and current. Here we find keywords like “Trust” and “Perceived Risk”, indicating that these are central topics in recent and highly cited publications ( Jocevski et al., 2020 ). Quadrant III (Lower Left – Less Frequent, Less Current): Contains declining or niche topics that were studied more in the past but are currently less relevant. Terms like “Smartphone”, “e-wallet”, and “Willingness to Pay” fall in this area, indicating a decrease in research attention. Quadrant IV (Lower Right – More Frequent, Less Current): Includes well-established but mature or saturated themes, such as “Consumer Behavior” and “Perceived Risk”, which have been frequently studied in the past but show less recent activity ( Cocosila & Trabelsi, 2016 ). Theory analysis This section identifies the main theories that have tried to explain the phenomenon of the adoption and use of mobile payments through multiple models. Table 1 presents 9 typologies of the most common theories in the academic production of the subject studied from 2004 to 2022, showing that over the years, many models have been developed in the various economic sectors. Among them, the following are identified: Table 1. Adoption theories in mobile payments. Model Frequency Authors TAM extended 23 ( Yan et al., 2021 ); ( Vandana & Mathur, 2022 ); ( Tounekti et al., 2020 ); ( Sleiman et al., 2021 ); ( Sembiring et al., 2022 ); ( Schmidthuber et al., 2020 ); ( Quan et al., 2023 ); ( Qu et al., 2018 ); ( Peng et al., 2012 ); ( Lwoga & Lwoga, 2017 ); ( Lui et al., 2021 ); ( Muñoz-Leiva et al., 2017 ); ( F. Liébana-Cabanillas et al., 2015 ); ( Li et al., 2019 ); ( Lew et al., 2020 ); ( Koenig-Lewis et al., 2015 ); ( Kim & Kim, 2022 ); ( Ibrahim et al., 1 C.E. ); ( Gbongli et al., 2019 ); ( de Luna et al., 2019 ); ( Almajali et al., 2022 ); ( Agárdi & Alt, 2022 ); ( Josephng et al., 2022 ) UTAUT Extended 12 ( Wei et al., 2021 ); ( Singh & Somaiya, 2020 ); ( Patil et al., 2020 ); ( Ojo et al., 2022 ); ( Możdżyński & Cellary, 1 C.E. ); ( Malarvizhi et al., 2022 ); ( Liu et al., 2022 ); ( Lin et al., 2021 ); ( Lee et al., 2019 ); ( Chang et al., 1 C.E. ); ( Akanferi et al., 2022 ); ( Migliore et al., 2022 ) UTAUT 3 ( Ariffin & Lim, 2020 ); ( Zhao et al., 2021 ); ( Hee et al., 2020 ) TAM 3 ( Nan et al., 2020 ); ( Hee et al., 2020 ); ( Zhao et al., 2021 ) IRT 2 ( Kaur et al., 2020 ); ( Migliore et al., 2022 ) TPB Extended 1 ( Belanche et al., 2022 ) TPB 1 ( Josephng et al., 2022 ) ECT 1 ( Nan et al., 2020 ) Own models 17 The technology acceptance model (TAM), initially proposed by Davis in ( Davis, 1989 ), has been taken by researchers as the basic theoretical framework to explore the adoption behavior of mobile payments of users. This theory arises by modifying the theory of reasoned action (TRA) defined in ( Fishbein & Ajzen, 1977 ), such as social pressure from others on the behavior and decisions of an individual. This modification that determined the TAM model was used to explain to the users their intention to use and adopt new technologies, considering as predictive variables of this phenomenon the ease of use (EOU), the perceived usefulness (PU), and attitude towards use (ATU) ( Al-Husamiyah & Al-Bashayreh, 2022 ). At the same time, the TAM model has been modified as it has been implemented in various contexts, justified by the particularities that consumers may have for each technology ( Pliatsikas & Economides, 2022 ). For example, ( Vandana & Mathur, 2022 ) presented an extended model that added to the study the variables trust, perceived security, convenience and social influence to predict the use of mobile payments through fintech technologies. In the same way ( Tounekti et al., 2020 ) raised the factors in the study based on several characteristics of the means of payment: security, perceived ease, privacy, convenience, portability, accuracy, payment term, rate and cost and secure payment methods to determine the variables that consider the consumers to prefer a means of payment. While these modifications were emerging, some studies addressed the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) developed by ( Venkatesh et al., 2012 ), which are analyzed as variables responsible for the behavioral intention to adopt a technological system at the performance expectation, effort expectation, social influence and facilitating conditions. An example of applications is ( Zhao et al., 2021 ), which proposes a theoretical adoption model integrating the UTAUT and two additional variables: confidence and perceived security; thus, it is evident that all these theories make significant contributions by combining more extensive models with other at-tributes of human behavior, while the findings from Al-saedi et al.’s (2020) research suggest that performance expectancy is the primary determinant of the intention to use a mobile payment system, with social influence, effort expectancy, perceived trust, perceived cost, and self-efficacy following in that order. That compared to what Lisana (2021) proposed self-efficacy has the largest total effect on behavioral intention, followed in decreasing order of importance by perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, social influence, trust, network externalities, and uncertainty avoidance. On the other hand, the innovation resistance theory (IRT) examines behavior based on the reasoning for decision-making related to the use of innovations due to the possible impacts of their applications and changes in consumer belief systems ( Hew et al., 2019 ). This individual resistance can be relevant in the success or failure of developing new technologies, especially since innovations will continue to make their way into the market. The latter has recently led to the recognition of IRT in the literature as the theoretical basis for adopting mobile payments ( Kaur et al., 2020 ). Since according to Handarkho and Harjoseputro (2019) consumer innovativeness is the factor that most directly influences the adoption of mobile advertising, followed by willingness to negotiate, perceived convenience and perceived herd behavior. The work of ( Kaur et al., 2020 ) proposed a model to evaluate the psychological and functional barriers as variables that explain the adoption of mobile payments, taking into account the impact on consumer behavior for the first time and in the continued use of this technology. In this sense, IRT has also recently been integrated into studies of acceptance of mobile payments, combined with other theories such as the UTAUT, as in ( Migliore et al., 2022 ), where it was proposed to identify the current psychological and functional barriers, which are key in the intention to use mobile payments between Italy and China. Another frequent theory in the literature is the theory of planned behavior (TPB), which states that the behaviors of the individual are determined by three key factors: attitude, subjective norms, and behavioral control ( Josephng et al., 2022 ). The TPB emerges from the TRA of Fishbone and Janzen 1975, which was modified by Ajzen from 1985 to 1991, adding the variable perceived behavioral control, which was relevant when explaining the decision of the users ( Josephng et al., 2022 ). Thus, this dimension included a general vigilance of the consumer, where perceived behavioral control (PBC) depends on the person’s particular capacities and internal and external limitations. Additionally, the Expectation Confirmation Theory (ECT) is observed in the literature, which proposes explaining the characteristics of the consumer who decides to repurchase or intends to continue using a digital payment means ( Hadji & Degoulet, 2016 ). Among these studies ( Nan et al., 2020 ), combines the ECT model measured mainly by the satisfaction factor with the dimensions of the TAM model theory to explain the rapid spread of social mobile payment. Analysis of the main variables Likewise, reviewing the theories described above allowed us to reveal the most representative variables in the academic production of the subject analyzed from 2004 to 2022, as presented in Table 2 , relating the variables to the authors who have addressed them. Table 2. Most important variables of the adoption of mobile payments. Variable Frequency Perceived trust 45 Perceived ease of use 36 Perceived usefulness 35 Perceived risk 31 Perceived social influence 29 Perceived expectation 26 Attitude towards use 14 Facilitating conditions 11 Perceived enjoyment 11 Perceived personal innovation 10 Perceived quality of the system 9 Behavioural intention 9 Perceived convenience 8 Perceived compatibility 7 Perceived value 7 Perceived benefits 5 Perceived cost 5 Gender 5 Use of mobile payments 5 From there, 19 variables are observed, which are defined considering the meanings established by the authors in the development within each model or applied context. First, perceived trust is the most commonly used variable in studies of digital payment adoption, and it lack is one of the main reasons why online payments are not adopted. Thus, trust is defined as the level of risk associated with the use of technological innovations and as when the consumer does not have information or a reliable link before the preliminary encounter with technology ( Talwar et al., 2020 ). In the TAM model, perceived ease of use is a variable analyzed in the studies as the clear and understandable interaction between the user and the mobile payment technology tool is understood as an activity that does not require any mental effort on the part of the consumer (F. Liébana-Cabanillas et al., 2015 ). In this sense, the perceived useful-ness factor is related to the fact that the user’s decision to adopt online payments is determined when he evaluates whether, in these services, he finds a possible beneficial result ( Zhao et al., 2021 ). In the evolution of the revised academic production, one of the studies that mostly covers the most common concepts or dimensions to try to predict the adoption of online payments is “Predicting the Intention and Adoption of Near Field Communication Mobile Payment” by ( Malarvizhi et al., 2022 ). For example, the perceived risk variable was detailed as an additional factor for the extended UTAUT and measured the degree of uncertainty the user has regarding the threats of using technology for the first time. Perceived social influence corresponds to the effect of the opinion of family, friends, relatives, and superiors on consumers and their adoption of mobile payments. Another dimension this study defines is the perceived expectation associated with the user’s expected performance. They will be interested in using online payments if they are considered advantageous and capable of improving their performance in said procedure or activity. Another important factor that is highlighted in this review is attitude, which, according to what is stated in ( Ariffin & Lim, 2020 ), has been validated and measured in the theory of planned behavior model to explain the feelings of individuals regarding whether their behavior is favorable or unfavorable to the use of technology. Additionally, according to ( Josephng et al., 2022 ), attitude can be due to motivations, intensity and negative or positive convictions that influence consumer behavior when making payments online. Meanwhile, the innovative behavior of the individual has also been studied to predict the intention to use the technologies that allow mobile payments. In this respect, ( Najdawi et al., 2021 ) defines the perceived personal innovation factor as the level at which the user is considered a technological pioneer and is a determining factor influencing the adoption of electronic payment systems. Other factors arise from the user’s experience with technology; for example, the perceived enjoyment dimension is defined as the satisfaction related to the intention to use any techno-logical product or service ( Sleiman et al., 2021 ). Finally, the interest of the subject is highlighted by analyzing factors related to the perception of value generation provided by the use of online payments in such a way that the same variable has taken various names: the perceived value factor has been used to measure the perception of the value of technological innovations in customers based on the risks and benefits generated with their adoption; in relation to perceived convenience, this evaluates the combination of the usefulness of time and place in the use of the means of payment ( Al-Qudah et al., 2022 ); and finally, the dimension perceived benefits has tried to explain the psychological conditions responsible for the perception of benefit, which determines the use of online payments ( Zhao et al., 2021 ). It is important to highlight that, although the “gender” variable is commonly used as demographic information or moderating factor in the instruments, it stands out as one of the most frequently mentioned in the formulation of hypotheses in various studies. For example, Wei et al. (2021) identifies it as crucial in modulating the effects of various factors on mobile payment adoption. Likewise, Liu et al. (2022) examines its impact on consumers’ behavioral intention toward the use of mobile payment apps. These researchers explored whether gender had any effect on performance expectations, ease of use, and social influence with respect to consumers’ behavioral intention toward mobile payment application. Discussion After examining the research and academic production related to mobile payment adoption, key trends around the evolution of studies stand out. The essential theme emerges from literature related to “Theoretical Adoption Models,” where various theories have been proposed to explain the phenomenon of mobile payment adoption and usage. Notably, the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) have been highlighted. These models have undergone modifications and adaptations to different contexts, reflecting the complexity of factors influencing user decisions and emphasizing the “Significant Variables in Adoption” of mobile payments. In this context, one of the highlighted aspects is trust, identified as the preeminent factor and projected as the most prominent trend for 2023. Trust, as per literature, is addressed in mobile payment adoption through the functional reliability of mobile payment systems, general willingness to trust, and cultural background, particularly uncertainty avoidance. These are key factors influencing consumers’ intention to adopt mobile payment ( Xin et al., 2015 ). It is mentioned that trust can have a positive effect on mobile payment adoption. When customers perceive mobile payment providers and their applications as reliable, they are more likely to adopt them. Furthermore, trust is linked to changes in customer payment habits ( Hasan, Ashfaq & Shao, 2021 ), highlighting the need for companies to invest in effective security measures ( Allahham & Ahmad, 2024 ). This is due to the concept of “Perceived Risk,” which has experienced a notable increase in frequency, especially in the years 2012, 2021, and 2022. It is argued that the perception of risk is closely linked to emotions and the uncertainty associated with potential economic losses in online transactions. Research emphasizes the importance of analyzing risk from a psychological perspective regarding user behavior in virtual purchases and online transactions, noting that consumers have concerns about the risk of using mobile payments and need assurances that their personal information is secure. It is suggested that a lower perception of risk and increased security can enhance trust among consumers and their intention to use mobile payments. Additionally, it is noted that, despite potential risks in mobile payments, security measures such as passwords, facial or fingerprint recognition have been implemented to protect users, improving the security of these services ( Hasan et al., 2023 ). From this, perceived risk is considered a formative construct, proposing it as a second-order factor of seven defined risks: financial risk, performance risk, psychological risk, time risk, security risk, social risk, and privacy risk ( Ramtiyal, Verma & Rathore, 2022 ). Moreover, literature focuses on “Social and Technological Influence” in the evolution of mobile payment studies. In the last decade, there has been a shift towards social influence factors, paying special attention to human relationships, social networks, and technology perception. This shift correlates with significant technological advances, such as the growing importance of Fintech, which has expanded access to various banking services in digital environments ( Hassan et al., 2019 ). Additionally, the combination of technological advances with theories exploring individual behavior and usage intention reveals the interconnection between the technological sphere and social relationships, indicating the need to address these aspects together in future research ( Wei et al., 2021 ; Ariffin & Lim, 2020 ). The Fintech theme is extensively addressed in the study, emphasizing the importance of financial technology adoption. Key drivers of Fintech adoption are mentioned, such as smartphone development, mobile internet technologies, and the convenience of mobile payments. Furthermore, the challenges and opportunities faced by companies are discussed ( Hasan, Ashfaq & Shao, 2021 ). The Fintech theme is currently present in the study of the evolution of payment systems and transfer networks, especially in the context of mobile technologies and virtual wallets. It highlights the transformation of digital strategies in the financial landscape by offering innovative electronic deposit solutions, driven by a combination of technological advances, regulatory changes, and simpler organizational structures that enable faster deployment of payment technologies than traditional banks. Analyzing the transactional behavior networks of users is mentioned as providing valuable information about the adoption of new payment technologies and the evolution of mobile payment systems ( León, 2021 ). In this way, the current theme, viewed from different perspectives, utilizes cutting-edge technologies to innovate in products and create differentiation in the market, focusing on security, ease of use, and efficiency. It is emphasized that Fintech technologies have the potential to make fundamental financial services more accessible, convenient, and secure. It is projected to enhance emerging economies by addressing challenges present in their adoption ( Patnaik et al., 2023 ). In this regard, Fintech not only transforms digital strategies but also contributes to making financial services more accessible, convenient, and secure, with the potential to boost developing economies. It presents itself as a complex phenomenon influenced by interconnected factors, where trust, perceived risk, and technological evolution play central roles in shaping the current and future landscape of payment systems. Theoretical and practical implications This research has significant theoretical implications for the field. Firstly, the analysis of the frequency of publications per year indicates an exponential growth in interest and attention dedicated to this topic over time. This increase in academic production reflects the growing importance and relevance of the phenomenon of mobile payment adoption in the current context of digital transformation and changes in consumer behavior. Secondly, identifying the main theoretical references used by researchers provides a comprehensive understanding of the conceptual frameworks and explanatory models that support the study of mobile payment adoption. The frequent use of models such as UTAUT (Unified Technology Acceptance Model) and TAM (Technology Acceptance Model) highlights the significance of comprehending the psychological and social factors that impact users’ attitudes and behaviors towards these technologies. Thirdly, analyzing concept evolution helps identify areas of interest and emerging concepts in this field of study. The appearance of terms such as ‘security’, ‘perceived usefulness’, and ‘user experience’ suggests a growing concern for aspects related to trust, effectiveness, and user satisfaction in the context of mobile payments. Furthermore, the analysis of emerging and growing keywords emphasizes the need to investigate specific aspects, such as the influence of the pandemic on the adoption of mobile payments, the evolution of technologies like QR codes, and the integration of mobile payment systems in different cultural and economic contexts. Identifying research gaps in the literature provides guidance for future research and the formulation of research agendas. Potential areas of study may include exploring contextual and cultural factors that influence the adoption of mobile payments, designing effective education and communication strategies to promote the acceptance of these technologies, and evaluating the social and economic impacts of their large-scale implementation. This study lays a strong foundation for comprehending and advancing theory in this field, while identifying research areas that can contribute to the ongoing enhancement of practices and policies related to mobile payment systems. The findings of this research have several theoretical and practical implications. First, there is no evidence in the literature of bibliometric and systematic reviews focused on strictly analyzing the adoption models and the variables associated with these theories, as is the case of ( Tounekti et al., 2020 ), which, although recent, does not delve into or compare the variables and theories involved in the acceptance of mobile interfaces to make payments. It is also clear that as time passes, technological advances undergo improvements that impact the commercial activities of businesses, making it necessary to understand how consumers select their payment methods since this would benefit online retailers, e-commerce sites, virtual payment method providers and web developers. Thus, these results could contribute to guiding policies for emerging companies, managers, government agencies and private service providers interested in mobile payment services. Consequently, stakeholders with an important role in the electronic commerce system must initially recognize the importance of new payment methods and their operation, as well as the benefits perceived by users, until they focus on taking advantage of the characteristics of the innovation and technology to maintain the quality, reliability and efficiency of the service and at the same time satisfy the physical and mental expectations of the users, thus achieving the acceptance of their products in terms of the design of the system attributes. The preceding is essential to improve the public experience of the mobile payment user because it would promote a positive social effect on the reputation of technology providers in different situations who are obliged to guarantee the compatibility, efficiency and security of transactions and adapt to the client’s lifestyle. The results also show that the most popular means to carry out commercial transactions is payment through mobile devices, given the increase in the number of users who use smartphones and because it provides agility and allows more efficient transactions (J. Li et al., 2019 ), especially under emergency conditions such as the pandemic, a situation in which the stable development of businesses is possible ( Zhao et al., 2021 ). Therefore, this work expands the literature on the adoption of mobile payments and the interaction between the consumer and innovative technologies, reflecting the motivations of users in the search to accept alternative payment mechanisms. Likewise, this research offers new insights by comparing the different factors and theories that explain the intention to use and adopt online payments. This study offers a broad and precise overview of the emerging issues and the theoretical evolution related to accepting payments through electronic devices. It provides information that is also relevant to conceptualize this issue better; therefore, it also contributes by guiding thematic lines for future research. In this regard, this study has built a research framework on mobile payment that will serve as a practical guide so that academics and professionals can consult to contextualize themselves and address future studies without problems. This knowledge framework will allow the establishment of new models based on the variables that are trends and in which they can be derived from the research agenda proposed in this study. Finally, the value of this document also lies in disseminating knowledge to an important audience that includes professionals and researchers in areas similar to the development of electronic interfaces for payments, which out-lines and identifies future research opportunities. The research findings emphasize the importance of considering the expectation of effort as a determining factor in the adoption of mobile payments. Studies by Yu et al. (2021) and Fedorko et al. (2021) demonstrate how the perception of difficulty or complexity in using these platforms can significantly influence users’ willingness to adopt them. In this sense, companies and developers should prioritize designing intuitive interfaces and fluid payment processes that minimize user effort. This focus on ease of use not only improves the user experience but can also be a determining factor in the competitiveness and long-term success of mobile payment solutions in an increasingly saturated and demanding market. The relevance of mobile payment systems across diverse socioeconomic contexts can be better understood through the analysis of successful implementations. One notable case is M-Pesa, a mobile payment platform that has transformed financial inclusion in several developing countries. As highlighted by Wenner et al. (2018) , M-Pesa and other similar initiatives operate in low-resource environments, leveraging mobile phone infrastructure to offer secure and accessible financial services. These systems not only reduce transaction costs for users but also promote transparency and efficiency for organizations. The study presents a set of twelve organizational models derived from 64 global m-payment applications, showcasing how flexible architectures can adapt to varying local needs and constraints in underserved regions. Another exemplary case is found in Taiwan, where a leading financial institution successfully adapted to the mobile payment landscape by implementing the RACE framework—a strategic model built around Resources, Alliances, Customers, and Ecosystems. As described by Shang and Chiu (2023) , this bank managed to transition from a traditional service provider into a competitive digital player by aligning internal capabilities with external opportunities. The case highlights how dynamic resource management and strategic coopetition allowed the organization to overcome market disruption and sustain innovation in mobile payment technologies. This example underscores the importance of organizational agility and long-term strategic vision in more developed, competitive markets. Similarly, the importance of clear and informative communication regarding the benefits and ease of mobile payments is highlighted by these findings. Therefore, companies and financial service providers should try to clearly explain how mobile payment platforms can simplify financial transactions and reduce the cognitive and operational burden for users. Proactive and transparent communication can decrease perceived barriers related to effort and build user confidence in the security and effectiveness of mobile payment solutions. This ultimately provides clarity in communication and education about the practical benefits and ease of use of mobile payments, which can be important catalysts for greater consumer adoption and acceptance. By understanding the underlying theories that inform technology adoption and the factors that influence it, researchers and practitioners can design more effective strategies to encourage acceptance and use of mobile payments. For instance, companies can develop more user-friendly interfaces and intuitive payment processes by identifying key variables that affect the intention to adopt mobile payments, such as effort expectancy and perceived usefulness. This, in turn, can increase user satisfaction and adoption of these technologies. Furthermore, practitioners can direct resources and efforts towards research and development of innovative solutions that address user needs and concerns by recognizing research gaps and emerging areas of development. This strengthens the theoretical and practical foundation in the field of mobile payment adoption. Limitations This study has some limitations. First, for the selection and refinement of the data, the researchers examined the title, abstracts, and content of the article to minimize the presence of irrelevant articles; therefore, high-quality scientific articles that were deficient in choosing relevant keywords could have been excluded. At the same time, for the analysis of this work, the Scopus and Web of Science databases were evaluated and used, but other databases of scientific literature are undoubtedly important sources to capture existing thematic trends, such as Google Scholar, PubMed, IEEE Xplore, ProQuest or EBSCO; therefore, the search should be broadened by including them as well. From the data analysis, the nature of the bibliometric study methodology represents a limitation. Hence, it is recommended to explore combinations of bibliometric techniques and quantitative and qualitative approaches, as in this study, but this relationship between the findings can be complicated, according to Wallin (2005) . In this sense, estimating the number of citations analyses the scientific impact of the field of knowledge, but it may tend to underestimate the most recent articles. In terms of the analysis of countries, an author’s affiliation was considered, but not where the authors are from or their nationalities. Furthermore, only articles in English were included in this study. Despite these limitations, the results presented provide a valuable contribution to the knowledge related to adopting online payments. It is acknowledged that the use of the PRISMA methodology may not be necessary for this study on mobile payment adoption. However, this may limit the inclusion of valuable insights from relevant studies. Considering the extensive research in this field, a more inclusive approach may be preferable to encompass diverse perspectives and findings. Excluding significant studies could reduce overall understanding of the trends and factors influencing mobile payment adoption. Finally, it is recognized that the wide range of years covered in this study, from 2004 to 2023, could introduce certain limitations in the ability to accurately capture the most recent and relevant dynamics. For future research, it is suggested that a more specific and narrower period be considered, perhaps limiting the analysis to the last three to five years. This strategy would allow for a more focused assessment of the most current developments and provide a sharper perspective on trends and changes that have occurred in a more recent time frame. Research gaps In continuity with this study, Table 3 presents the gaps and research questions identified from the analysis and review of the scientific publications available in the field of research on the adoption of mobile payments so that other authors can enter and carry out new studies, with the idea of being able to fill these theoretical gaps, to be able to understand and analyze in depth the factors that determine the adoption of these technologies, thus con-tributing to their successful implementation and maximization of benefits for users and organizations. Table 3. Gaps and guiding questions for future research. Topic Research gaps Research questions Theories of adoption and use of technology Need to identify contextual factors (social, cultural, economic, demographic, and geographic) that influence the adoption of mobile payments. How do contextual factors (social, cultural, economic, demographic, and geographic) influence the adoption of mobile payments? Lack of empirical studies that integrate multiple theories to explain the adoption of mobile payments. How can the main adoption theories be integrated to understand the adoption factors of mobile payments comprehensively? Lack of studies examining the adoption of mobile payments in emerging country contexts. How does the adoption of mobile payments vary in the contexts of emerging countries? Need to expand research on the factors that affect perceived trust. What factors determine perceived trust? Need to investigate how emotional aspects influence the adoption of mobile payments. How do emotional aspects influence the adoption of mobile payments? Scarcity of studies using psychobehavioural theories to understand the effects of personality on the adoption of mobile payments. How does personality influence the adoption of mobile payments? Variables of adoption of smart homes addressed Need to investigate the effects of previous experience in the adoption of mobile payments How does previous experience influence the adoption of mobile payments? Need to deepen the importance of the current use of mobile payments How does the adoption of mobile payments influence its current use? Lack of research on the role of attitude towards use in adopting mobile payments. How does attitude towards use influence the adoption of mobile payments? Scarcity of studies investigating the influence of perceived privacy on the adoption of mobile payments. How does perceived privacy influence the adoption of mobile payments? Lack of research on how the perception of value and user satisfaction influence the intention of continued use of mobile payments. How does the perception of value and user satisfaction influence the intention of continued use of mobile payments? Scarcity of studies investigating the influence of age and gender on the adoption of mobile payments. How do age and gender influence the adoption of mobile payments? Lack of research on the influence of convenience on the adoption and continued use of mobile payments. How does convenience influence the adoption and continued use of mobile payments? Need to investigate the influence of accessibility on the adoption of mobile payments, including access to mobile devices and internet connectivity. How does accessibility influence the adoption of mobile payments? Lack of research on the relationship between the perception of security and trust in the adoption and continued use of mobile payments. How does the perception of security influence trust and the adoption and continued use of mobile payments? Scarcity of studies investigating the influence of cost and convenience in adopting mobile payments. How do cost and convenience influence the adoption of mobile payments? Lack of research on how adoption variables vary in different cultural contexts. How do adoption variables vary in different cultural contexts? Need to investigate the effects of user experience on the adoption and continued use of mobile payments. How does the user’s experience influence mobile payment adoption and continued use? Lack of research on the factors that influence the intention to continue using mobile payments. What factors influence the intention to continue using mobile payments? Scarcity of studies investigating the relationship between perceived security and the adoption of mobile payments. How does perceived security influence the adoption of mobile payments? Growing and emerging themes Need to investigate the influence of promotions and discounts on the adoption of mobile payments. How do promotions and discounts influence the adoption of mobile payments? Lack of research on the factors that influence the adoption of mobile payments in small and medium businesses. What factors influence the adoption of mobile payments in small and medium businesses? Need to investigate how communication and education can increase the adoption of mobile payments. How can communication and education increase the adoption of mobile payments? Lack of research on the relationship between mobile payment adoption and customer loyalty. How does the adoption of mobile payments influence customer loyalty? Scarcity of studies investigating the adoption and use of mobile payments in the government sphere. How are mobile payments adopted and used in government? Investigative agenda Finally, Figure 8 presents a proposed research agenda for this systemaztic review with the idea that other researchers can take it as a guide for future scientific studies based on topics considered as trends, emerging and current. First, the 63 articles resulting from applying the PRISMA methodology in the filtering process (inclusion and exclusion criteria) of the records obtained in the search for information were reviewed. From there, this research agenda is proposed after reviewing these documents for the 30 most important terms that the authors have proposed in their studies on the adoption of mobile payments, examining two important points: (1) the time in which the term has been addressed in the literature and (2) the year of greatest relevance in academic production. The latter indicates the period in which the concept had a greater role in academic production, and at the same time, they were studied in the last year. Figure 8. Proposed research agenda. Alt text Figure 8 . Diagram outlining the proposed research agenda. In this manner, when comparing the concepts of Figure 8 , mobile commerce stands out as the term that has been analyzed during a longer window of time, appearing in the scientific literature approximately in 2007 and remaining as a current term in the research to date. Although its most representative year was 2017, it is still positioned among the most relevant keywords, which conceptualizes adopting online payments. Continuing with the analysis, the keyword that occupies the second place as the term with the highest remaining in the academic production of the subject is consumer behavior. This topic is important to understand, on the one hand, the new challenges, and opportunities that companies face with innovations and, on the other hand, consumer acceptance of technological development, especially to understand the adoption factors for mobile payments. Studies such as ( Zhong & Moon, 2022 ) highlight the importance of studying the factors associated with user behavior when choosing a virtual payment method. This term then emerged in the literature as of 2009 and is still in force today, with 2019 standing out as the most relevant in the proposed studies. Among the topics that are presumed to have reached maturity or saturation of information are an intention to use, e-commerce and smartphone. These terms were relevant to building the fundamental conceptual frameworks of the adoption of mobile payments and the theories of acceptance. However, they are no longer valid in the literature, either because of new topics related to technological developments that have updated knowledge or by new needs that the consumer is acquiring. For example, Figure 8 shows fintech as a current topic, which has appeared in the academic context since 2016 but mainly reflects how technological advances and digitization have disrupted the financial services industry. In this regard, new studies should address variables related to technological factors, internet connectivity and innovative interface design from the business point of view and the relationship of these with online payment service providers to offer a better understanding of their adoption. In terms of the theories that explain the adoption of online payments, Figure 8 indicates that the UTAUT and extended UTAUT models and the variables innovation, social influence, perceived safety, perceived risk, trust, and perceived usefulness are currently in force and have been the object of study for many years in the literature, which indicates that they will continue to be a fundamental part of the subject in future studies. On the other hand, when analyzing the terms that are considered recent in the literature and that appear as current trends, from which future research may be deduced, we find continuance intention, appearing in the literature since 2019 and in force this year. This concept has been changing the focus of the studies on using virtual payments for the first time towards their continued use. That is, it works on issues in a transversal way related to user satisfaction and experience, seeking to increase motivation in them, towards loyalty to the services and against the intention of continuing to use the mobile payment system ( Duy Phuong et al., 2020 ). This perspective has been developed by several researchers, which justifies a more detailed analysis of how consumers’ reactions affect when the company, through its strategies in the sale of services and products, implements variables such as discounts on the invoice, return payment of cash and gifts. Another novel approach is the appearance of COVID-19 in 2020 and its year of greatest relevance in the literature in 2021. This is understandable due to the significant impact on markets and online payment systems that the pandemic had on consumers and companies that adopted them to survive in the industry ( Cao, 2021 ). At the same time, this topic, which is expected to continue to rise in academic production, invites business studies through two important variables: the ability to use mobile technologies and the benefits of mobile payments. The preceding also reveals that companies could direct their efforts to promote services to users with experience in mobile devices due to the rise of these due to the pandemic. Faced with the methodologies implemented in the studies analyzed, Figure 8 also shows that since 2016, methods such as PLS-SEM and structural equation modelling (SEM) continue to be present today as a valuable multivariate analysis technique to test structural models on the adoption of mobile payments. Likewise, the case studies using the concepts of India and China are reported as methods that are still useful to enrich the different contexts in which the adoption of mobile payments is implemented, in addition to being cases that stood out as the greatest relevance in the literature for 2019. It is noteworthy that the detailed review that was carried out in this study also allowed us to recognize some fields that, although not listed in the graph shown, are expected to be a trend in the short term, as they are derived from variables already analyzed in the theories of adoption of mobile payments, such as the performance and user expectations (efficiency, speed, flexibility and security) in transactions. These fields are biometric authentication, payment flexibility, social purchases (on social media), and contactless payments. Conclusions This study identified the research trends associated with adopting mobile payments to guide an agenda for future studies. The analysis allowed a comprehensive review through bibliometric indicators and a systematic literature review of 63 documents. The results allow us to conclude that the publications around the adoption of mobile payments follow an upwards trajectory where researchers have addressed many theories to explain this phenomenon. Among them, the main trends stand out: the technological acceptance model (TAM) and the unified theory of technology acceptance and use (UTAUT), which in the literature have been modified, including new factors to be worked on extensively in various contexts. In relation to this, the variables innovation, social influence, perceived safety, perceived risk, trust, and perceived usefulness are postulated as research trends that predict the behavior of intention to use mobile payment methods by potential users. In addition to the above, this study identified among the research trends the transition towards an approach for the acceptance of these technologies, such as the continuance intention variable, based on the intention of continued use of mobile services for payment and not on the intention to use technology for the first time, as it had been studied during the first decade of thematic evolution. In future studies, the research agenda suggests considering some guidelines, such as biometric authentication, payment flexibility, social purchases (in social networks) and contactless payments, and at the same time, from the business point of view and the relationship between these with online payment service providers, suggests developing studies on technological factors, internet connectivity and innovative interface design. Ethics and consent Ethical approval and consent were not required. Data availability statement Underlying data: No data are associated with this article. Extended data Zenodo: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14426875 ( Valencia-Arias et al., 2024 ). The project contains the following data • Database • Flowchart diagram • PRISMA checklist The data availability statement for this study has been duly registered and archived in the Zenodo open data repository, which is recognized for its commitment to the accessibility and preservation of scientific data. The data and materials supported by this study are publicly available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. References Abbasi GA, Sandran T, Ganesan Y, et al. : Go cashless! Determinants of continuance intention to use E-wallet apps: A hybrid approach using PLS-SEM and fsQCA. Technol. Soc. 2022; 68 : 101937. Publisher Full Text ABI Research: Mobile wallets showing strong post-COVID growth, rising to 5.6 billion in circulation by 2027. 2022. Reference Source Agárdi I, Alt MA: Do digital natives use mobile payment differently than digital immigrants? A comparative study between generation X and Z. Electron. Commer. Res. 2022; 1–28. Publisher Full Text Agarwal S, Pandey R, Kumar S, et al. : Workplace incivility: A retrospective review and future research agenda. Saf. Sci. 2023; 158 : 105990. Publisher Full Text Akanferi AA, Asampana I, Matey AH, et al. : ADOPTION OF MOBILE COMMERCE AND MOBILE PAYMENTS IN GHANA: AN EXAMINATION OF FACTORS INFLUENCING PUBLIC SERVANTS. Interdiscip. J. Inf. Knowl. Manag. 2022; 17 : 287–313. Publisher Full Text Al-Saedi K, Al-Emran M, Ramayah T, et al. : Developing a general extended utaut model for m-payment adoption. Technol. Soc. 2020; 62 : 101293. Publisher Full Text Al-Husamiyah A, Al-Bashayreh M: A comprehensive acceptance model for smart home services. Int. J. Data Netw. Sci. 2022; 6 (1): 45–58. Publisher Full Text Alkadi RS, Abed SS: Consumer acceptance of FinTech app payment services: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2023; 18 (4): 1838–1860. Publisher Full Text Allahham M, Ahmad AYB: Ai-induced anxiety in the assessment of factors influencing the adoption of mobile payment services in supply chain firms: a mental accounting perspective. Int. J. Data Netw. Sci. 2024; 8 (1): 505–514. Publisher Full Text Almajali D, Al-Okaily M, Al-Daoud K, et al. : Go Cashless! Mobile Payment Apps Acceptance in Developing Countries: The Jordanian Context Perspective. Sustainability. 2022; 14 (20): 13524. Publisher Full Text Al-Qudah LA, Al-Hroot YA, Salam AOA: The effectiveness of creditworthiness indicators according to the PRISM model in granting credit decisions: The modifying role of the quality of accounting information (field study: Jordanian commercial banks). Jordan J. Bus. Adm. 2022; 18 (1). Andronie M, Lăzăroiu G, Ștefănescu R, et al. : Neuromanagement decision-making and cognitive algorithmic processes in the technological adoption of mobile commerce apps. Oeconomia Copernicana. 2021; 12 (4): 1033–1062. Publisher Full Text Anwar RN, Haider T, Hafeez M: Mobile payment adoption: A systematic literature review. Migrat. Lett. 2024; 21 (2): 101–116. https://migrationletters.com/index.php/ml/article/view/7855 . Ariffin SK, Lim KT: Investigating Factors Affecting Intention to Use Mobile Payment Among Young Professionals in Malaysia.2020; 6–11. Publisher Full Text Belanche D, Guinalíu M, Albás P: Customer adoption of p2p mobile payment systems: The role of perceived risk. Telematics Inform. 2022; 72 : 101851. Publisher Full Text Bojjagani S, Sastry VN, Chen CM, et al. : Systematic survey of mobile payments, protocols, and security infrastructure. J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2023; 14 (1): 609–654. Publisher Full Text Cao T: The study of factors on the small and medium enterprises’ adoption of mobile payment: Implications for the COVID-19 era. Front. Public Health 2021; 9 : 646592. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Chang V, Chen W, Xu QA, et al. : Towards the Customers’ Intention to Use QR Codes in Mobile Payments.1 C.E; 29 (6): 1–21. Publisher Full Text Changchit C, Cutshall R, Pholmask P: Extending UTAUT2 to predict mobile wallet adoption in Thailand. J. Open Innov.: Technol. Mark. Complex. 2023; 9 (2): 98. Publisher Full Text Chauhan V, Yadav J: Bibliometric review of telematics-based automobile insurance: Mapping the landscape of research and knowledge. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2024; 196 : 107428. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Cocosila M, Trabelsi H: An integrated value-risk investigation of contactless mobile payments adoption. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2016; 20 : 159–170. Publisher Full Text Codina L, Morales-Vargas A, Rodriguez-Martinez R, et al. : Uso de Scopus y Web of Science para investigar y evaluar en comunicacion social: analisis comparativo y caracterizacion. index.Comunicación. 2020; 10 . : 235–261. Publisher Full Text Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR: Technology acceptance model. J. Manag. Sci. 1989; 35 (8): 982–1003. Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, et al. : How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2021; 133 : 285–296. Publisher Full Text Dui Phuong NN, Luan LT, Dong VV, et al. : Examining customers’ continuance intentions towards e-wallet usage: The emergence of mobile payment acceptance in Vietnam. J. Asian Finance Econ. Bus. 2020; 7 (9): 505–516. Publisher Full Text Fedorko I, Bačik R, Gavurova B: Effort expectancy and social influence factors as main determinants of performance expectancy using electronic banking. Banks Bank Syst. 2021; 16 (2): 27–37. Publisher Full Text Fishbein M, Ajzen I: Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. 1977. Flavian C, Guinaliu M, Lu Y: Mobile payments adoption–introducing mindfulness to better understand consumer behavior. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2020; 38 (7): 1575–1599. Publisher Full Text Gbongli K, Xu Y, Amedjonekou KM: Extended Technology Acceptance Model to Predict Mobile-Based Money Acceptance and Sustainability: A Multi-Analytical Structural Equation Modeling and Neural Network Approach. Sustainability. 2019; 11 (13): 3639. Publisher Full Text George A, Sunny PM: Why do people continue using mobile wallets? An empirical study on post-adoption usage behavior during COVID-19. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2022; 15 (6): 267. Publisher Full Text Gupta K, Arora N: Investigating consumer intention to accept mobile payment systems through unified theory of acceptance model: An Indian perspective. South Asian J. Bus. Stud. 2020; 9 (1): 88–114. Publisher Full Text Hadji B, Degoulet P: Information system end-user satisfaction and continuance intention: A unified modeling approach. J. Biomed. Inform. 2016; 61 : 185–193. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Handarkho YD, Harjoseputro Y: Intention to adopt mobile payment in physical stores. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2019; 33 (2): 285–308. Publisher Full Text Hasan MJ, Hossain MA, Hossain MS, et al. : Investigating consumers’ intentions regarding the adoption of mobile payments: an sem-based empirical investigation. Asian Econ. Financ. Rev. 2023; 13 (9): 662–676. Publisher Full Text Hasan R, Ali M, Fatima T: Determinants of behavioral intention to use digital payment among Indian youngsters. J. Financ. Serv. Mark. 2024; 29 (1): 35–50. Publisher Full Text Hasan R, Ashfaq M, Shao L: Evaluating drivers of fintech adoption in the netherlands. Glob. Bus. Rev. 2021; 097215092110274. Publisher Full Text Hassan M, Kazmi SSAS, Padlee SF: Technology acceptance model (TAM) and dynamics of online purchase adaptability. Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng. 2019; 8 (1): 390–402. Hee OC, Ying KN, Kowang TO, et al. : What influences urbanites’ mobile payment adoption? The moderating roles of demographic divides. Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2020; 28 (4): 3253–3276. Publisher Full Text Hew JJ, Leong LY, Tan GWH, et al. : The age of mobile social commerce: An Artificial Neural Network analysis on its resistances. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change. 2019; 144 : 311–324. Publisher Full Text Ibrahim M, Hinson RE, Stephen A: Exploring Consumers’ Intention to Adopt Mobile Payment Systems in Ghana. IJESMA. 2022; 14 (1): 1–16. Publisher Full Text Jocevski M, Ghezzi A, Arvidsson N: Exploring the growth challenge of mobile payment platforms: A business model perspective. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2020; 40 : 100908. Publisher Full Text Johnson VL, Kiser A, Washington R, et al. : Limitations to the rapid adoption of M-payment services: Understanding the impact of privacy risk on M-Payment services. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018; 79 : 111–122. Publisher Full Text Josephng PS, Musallam M, Al-Rawahi K, et al. : Provoking Actual Mobile Payment Use in the Middle East. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2022; 5 (2): 37. Publisher Full Text Kalinić Z, Liébana-Cabanillas FJ, Muñoz-Leiva F, et al. : The moderating impact of gender on the acceptance of peer-to-peer mobile payment systems. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2020; 38 : 138–158. Publisher Full Text Karimi S, Liu YL: The differential impact of “mood” on consumers’ decisions, a case of mobile payment adoption. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020; 102 : 132–143. Publisher Full Text Kaur P, Dhir A, Singh N, et al. : An innovation resistance theory perspective on mobile payment solutions. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020; 55 : 102059. Publisher Full Text Kawamoto K, Tezuka T, Sasaki T: Determinants of success of mobile payments as innovations: Comparative case studies of Alipay, M-Pesa, and Nubank. Futur. Bus. J. 2023; 9 : Article 44. Publisher Full Text Kerviler G, Demoulin NT, Zidda P: Adoption of in-store mobile payment: Are perceived risk and convenience the only drivers? J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016; 31 : 334–344. Publisher Full Text Kim JW, Kim M: Intention to Use Mobile Easy Payment Services: Focusing on the Risk Perception of COVID-19. Front. Psychol. 2022; 13 : 878514. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Koenig-Lewis N, Marquet M, Palmer A, et al. : Enjoyment and social influence: predicting mobile payment adoption. Serv. Ind. J. 2015; 35 (10): 537–554. Publisher Full Text León C: The adoption of a mobile payment system: the user perspective. Latin Am. J. Central Bank. 2021; 2 (4): 100042. Publisher Full Text Lee JM, Lee B, Rha JY: Determinants of Mobile Payment Usage and the Moderating Effect of Gender: Extending the UTAUT Model with Privacy Risk. Int. J. Electron. Commer. Stud. 2019; 10 (1): 43–64. Publisher Full Text Lew S, Tan GWH, Loh XM, et al. : The disruptive mobile wallet in the hospitality industry: An extended mobile technology acceptance model. Technol. Soc. 2020; 63 : 101430. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Liébana-Cabanillas F, Muñoz-Leiva F, Sánchez-Fernández J: Influence of age in the adoption of new mobile payment systems. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios. 2015; 17 (58): 1390–1407. Publisher Full Text Liébana-Cabanillas FJ, García-Maroto I, Muñoz-Leiva F, et al. : Mobile Payment Adoption in the Age of Digital Transformation: The Case of Apple Pay. Sustainability. 2020; 12 : 5443. Publisher Full Text Liébana-Cabanillas FJ, Sánchez-Fernández J, Muñoz-Leiva F: Role of gender on acceptance of mobile payment. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2014; 114 : 220–240. Publisher Full Text Li J, Wang J, Wangh S, et al. : Mobile Payment with Alipay: An Application of Extended Technology Acceptance Model. IEEE Access. 2019; 7 : 50380–50387. Publisher Full Text Lin X, Suanpong K, Ruangkanjanases A, et al. : Improving the Sustainable Usage Intention of Mobile Payments: Extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model Combined With the Information System Success Model and Initial Trust Model. Front. Psychol. 2021; 12 . PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Lisana L: Factors influencing the adoption of mobile payment systems in Indonesia. Int. J. Web Inf. Syst. 2021; 17 (3): 0–10. Publisher Full Text Liu CH, Chen YT, Kittikowit S, et al. : Using Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology to Evaluate the Impact of a Mobile Payment App on the Shopping Intention and Usage Behavior of Middle-Aged Customers. Front. Psychol. 2022; 13 . PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Lui TK, Zainuldin MH, Yii KJ, et al. : Consumer adoption of alipay in Malaysia: The mediation effect of perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2021; 29 (1): 389–408. Publisher Full Text de Luna IR , Liébana-Cabanillas F, Sánchez-Fernández J, et al. : Mobile payment is not all the same: The adoption of mobile payment systems depending on the technology applied. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2019; 146 : 931–944. Publisher Full Text Lwoga ET, Lwoga NB: User Acceptance of Mobile Payment: The Effects of User-Centric Security, System Characteristics and Gender. Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries. 2017; 81 (1): 1–24. Publisher Full Text Malarvizhi CA, Al Mamun A, Jayashree S, et al. : Predicting the Intention and Adoption of Near Field Communication Mobile Payment. Front. Psychol. 2022; 13 . PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Migliore G, Wagner R, Cechella FS, et al. : Antecedents to the Adoption of Mobile Payment in China and Italy: an Integration of UTAUT2 and Innovation Resistance Theory. Inf. Syst. Front. 2022; 24 (6): 2099–2122. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Możdżyński D, Cellary W: Determinants of the Acceptance of Mobile Payment Systems by E-Merchants. JECO. 2022; 20 (1): 1–23. Publisher Full Text Mombeuil C: An exploratory investigation of factors affecting and best predicting the renewed adoption of mobile wallets. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020; 55 :102127. Publisher Full Text Muñoz-Leiva F, Climent-Climent S, Liébana-Cabanillas F: Determinants of intention to use the mobile banking apps: An extension of the classic TAM model. Span. J. Mark.-ESIC. 2017; 21 (1): 25–38. Publisher Full Text Najdawi ZC, Said R: Factors impacting digital payment adoption: An empirical evidence from Smart City of Dubai. Adv. Sci. Technol. Eng. Syst. 2021; 6 (1): 1208–1214. Publisher Full Text Nan D, Kim Y, Park MH, et al. : What Motivates Users to Keep Using Social Mobile Payments? Sustainability. 2020; 12 (17): 6878. Publisher Full Text Ojo AO, Fawehinmi O, Ojo OT, et al. : Consumer usage intention of electronic wallets during the COVID-19 pandemic in Malaysia.2022; 9 (1). Publisher Full Text Reference Source Oliveira T, Thomas M, Baptista G, et al. : Mobile payment: Understanding the determinants of customer adoption and intention to recommend the technology. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016; 61 : 404–414. Publisher Full Text Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. : The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021; 372 . Patil P, Tamilmani K, Rana NP, et al. : Understanding consumer adoption of mobile payment in India: Extending Meta-UTAUT model with personal innovativeness, anxiety, trust, and grievance redressal. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020; 54 : 102144. Publisher Full Text Patil PP, Dwivedi YK, Rana NP: Digital payments adoption: an analysis of literature.In Digital Nations–Smart Cities, Innovation, and Sustainability: 16th IFIP WG 6.11 Conference on E-Business, E-Services, and E-Society, I3E 2017, Delhi, India, November 21–23, 2017, Proceedings 16. (pp. 61–70). Springer International Publishing; 2017. Publisher Full Text Patnaik A, Kudal P, Dawar S, et al. : Exploring user acceptance of digital payments in india: an empirical study using an extended technology acceptance model in the fintech landscape. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Plan. 2023; 18 (8): 2587–2597. Publisher Full Text Peng R, Xiong L, Yang Z: Exploring Tourist Adoption of Tourism Mobile Payment: An Empirical Analysis. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2012; 7 (1): 5–6. Publisher Full Text Pliatsikas P, Economides AA: Factors Influencing Intention of Greek Consumers to Use Smart Home Technology. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2022; 5 : 26. Publisher Full Text Qu Y, Rong W, Chen H, et al. : Influencing Factors Analysis for a Social Network Web Based Payment Service in China. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2018; 13 (3): 99–113. Publisher Full Text Quan W, Moon H, Kim S(S), et al. : Mobile, traditional, and cryptocurrency payments influence consumer trust, attitude, and destination choice: Chinese versus Koreans. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2023; 108 : 103363. Publisher Full Text Rafdinal W, Senalasari W: Predicting the adoption of mobile payment applications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2021; 39 : 984–1002. Publisher Full Text Ramtiyal B, Verma D, Rathore AS: Role of risk perception and situational factors in mobile payment adoption among small vendors in unorganised retail. Electron. Commer. Res. 2022; 24 : 2693–2731. Publisher Full Text Schmidthuber L, Maresch D, Ginner M: Disruptive technologies and abundance in the service sector - toward a refined technology acceptance model. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020; 155 : 119328. Publisher Full Text Sembiring MJ, Wibowo W, Dewi GC: Adoption of innovative mobile payment technologies in Indonesia: The role of attitude. Innov. Mark. 2022; 18 (2): 186–197. Publisher Full Text Shang SS, Chiu LS: A RACE pathway for inventing and sustaining mobile payment innovation: A case study of a leading bank in Taiwan. Asia Pac. Manag. Rev. 2023; 28 (4): 401–409. Publisher Full Text Singh S, Somaiya KJ: Australasian Journal of Information Systems. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 2020; 24 : 1–27. Publisher Full Text Slade EL, Dwivedi YK, Piercy NC, et al. : Modeling Consumers’ Adoption Intentions of Remote Mobile Payments in the United Kingdom: Extending UTAUT with Innovativeness. Risk, and Trust. Psychol Mark. 2015; 32 : 860–873. Publisher Full Text Sleiman KAA, Juanli L, Lei H, et al. : User Trust levels and Adoption of Mobile Payment Systems in China: An Empirical Analysis. SAGE Open. 2021; 11 (4). Publisher Full Text Talwar S, Dhir A, Khalil A, et al. : Point of adoption and beyond. Initial trust and mobile-payment continuation intention. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020; 55 : 102086. Publisher Full Text Teng S, Khong KW: Examining actual consumer usage of Ewallet: A case study of big data analytics. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021; 121 : 106778. Publisher Full Text Tounekti O, Ruiz-Martinez A, Skarmeta Gomez AF: Users Supporting Multiple (Mobile) Electronic Payment Systems in Online Purchases: An Empirical Study of Their Payment Transaction Preferences. IEEE Access. 2020; 8 : 735–766. Publisher Full Text Valencia-Arias A, Cardona-Acevedo S, Gómez-Molina S, et al. : Smart home adoption factors: A systematic literature review and research agenda. PLoS One. 2023; 18 (10): e0292558. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Valencia-Arias A, Jimenez Garcia JA, Moreno G, et al. : Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda. [Data set]. Zenodo. 2024. Publisher Full Text Vandana, Mathur HP: Conceptual Development of Factors Driving Fintech Adoption by Farmers. PURUSHARTHA - A Journal of Management, Ethics and Spirituality. 2022; 15 (1): 39–50. Publisher Full Text Venkatesh V, Thong JY, Xu X: Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 2012; 36 : 157–178. Publisher Full Text Verma S, Chaurasia SS, Bhattacharyya SS: The effect of government regulations on continuance intention of in-store proximity mobile payment services. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2020; 38 (1): 34–62. Publisher Full Text Wallin JA: Bibliometric methods: pitfalls and possibilities. Basic Clin. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 2005; 97 (5): 261–275. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Wasil AR, Gillespie S, Patel R, et al. : Reassessing evidencebased content in popular smartphone apps for depression and anxiety: Developing and applying user-adjusted analyses. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 2020; 88 (11): 983–993. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Wei MF, Luh YH, Huang YH, et al. : Young Generation’s Mobile Payment Adoption Behavior: Analysis Based on an Extended UTAUT Model. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2021; 16 (4): 618–637. Publisher Full Text Wenner G, Bram JT, Marino M, et al. : Organizational models of mobile payment systems in low-resource environments. Inf. Technol. Dev. 2018; 24 (4): 681–705. Publisher Full Text Xin H, Techatassanasoontorn AA, Tan FB: Antecedents of consumer trust in mobile payment adoption. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 2015; 55 (4): 1–10. Publisher Full Text Yan LY, Tan GWH, Loh XM, et al. : QR code and mobile payment: The disruptive forces in retail. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021; 58 : 102300. Publisher Full Text Yang W, Vatsa P, Ma W, et al. : Does mobile payment adoption really increase online shopping expenditure in China: A gender-differential analysis. Econ. Anal. Policy. 2023; 77 : 99–110. Publisher Full Text Yu L, Chen Z, Yao P, et al. : A study on the factors influencing users’ online knowledge paying-behavior based on the UTAUT model. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2021; 16 (5): 1768–1790. Publisher Full Text Zhang Y, Kim J: A meta-analysis of mobile payment adoption: Integrating technology and trust perspectives. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2023; 57 : 101231. Publisher Full Text Zhao Y, Bacao Citation F, How F, et al. : How Does the Pandemic Facilitate Mobile Payment? An Investigation on Users’ Perspective under the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021; 18 (3): 1016. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Zhong Y, Moon HC: Investigating customer behavior of using contactless payment in China: A comparative study of facial recognition payment and mobile QRcode payment. Sustainability. 2022; 14 (12): 7150. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 31 Mar 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 School of Industrial Engineering, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, Lambayeque, 14001, Peru 2 Dirección de Planificación y Desarrollo Institucional, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, Lambayeque, 14001, Peru 3 Rectoría, Institucion Universitaria Marco Fidel Suarez, Medellín, Antioquia, 50030, Colombia 4 Instituto de Investigación y Estudios de la Mujer, Universidad Ricardo Palma, Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru 5 Escuela de posgrado, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, Lambayeque, Peru 6 Vicerrectoría de Investigación y Postgrado, Universidad de Los Lagos, Osorno, 5290000, Chile 7 Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Administrativas, Instituto Tecnologico Metropolitano, Medellín, Antioquia, 050034, Colombia Alejandro Valencia-Arias Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Jesus Alberto Jimenez Garcia Roles: Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Software, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Gustavo Moreno-López Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Aaron José Alberto Oré León Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Lucia Palacios-Moya Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Jackeline Valencia Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Martha Benjumea-Arias Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Methodology, Resources, Software, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (2) version 2 Revised Published: 20 Aug 2025, 14:358 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.159551.2 version 1 Published: 31 Mar 2025, 14:358 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.159551.1 Copyright © 2025 Valencia-Arias A et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Valencia-Arias A, Jimenez Garcia JA, Moreno-López G et al. Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.159551.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 20 Aug 2025 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Bhuiyan MRI and Mani L. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185656.r407431 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2#referee-response-407431 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 05 Sep 2025 Mohammad Rakibul Islam Bhuiyan , Begum Rokeya University, Rangpur, Bangladesh Lisa Mani , Finance and Banking, Shahjalal University of Science and Technology School of Management and Business Administration (Ringgold ID: 309531), Sylhet, Sylhet, Bangladesh Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185656.r407431 Thank you for revision. My decision is ... Continue reading READ ALL Thank you for revision. My decision is to accept this paper without any reservation. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Economics of Information Systems, Digital Payment Technology, Advanced Manufacturing, Information Privacy & Security, Industry 4.0 We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Bhuiyan MRI and Mani L. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185656.r407431 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2#referee-response-407431 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Estiyanti NM. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185656.r407430 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2#referee-response-407430 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 02 Sep 2025 Ni Made Estiyanti , Primakara University, Bali, Indonesia Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185656.r407430 Reviewer Report: Response to Author Revisions I appreciate the authors’ careful and thorough response to my initial review comments. The revised manuscript has been significantly improved in terms of methodological clarity, academic rigor, and analytical transparency. The ... Continue reading READ ALL Reviewer Report: Response to Author Revisions I appreciate the authors’ careful and thorough response to my initial review comments. The revised manuscript has been significantly improved in terms of methodological clarity, academic rigor, and analytical transparency. The authors have successfully addressed all the key points I raised: 1. Database Search Timeframe: The inclusion of the exact dates for the database searches in Scopus and Web of Science enhances the reproducibility of the study and strengthens the methodological foundation. This is a valuable addition. 2. Inclusion of Scholarly References: The revised introduction now includes updated and relevant citations that support the key claims. This greatly improves the scientific credibility of the paper and grounds the discussion in existing literature. 3. Clarity of Analytical Tools: The clarification regarding the use of Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace — including their specific roles in the analysis (e.g., burst detection in Figure 8 using CiteSpace) — has significantly improved the transparency and rigor of the methodological section. I appreciate the detailed mapping provided. 4. PRISMA Flow Diagram: The updated PRISMA diagram, with clear explanations for “report not retrievable” and “record excluded,” now provides a more transparent and comprehensive view of the screening process. This strengthens the trustworthiness of the literature selection. 5. Practical Case Studies: The inclusion of real-world examples of successful mobile payment systems adds valuable practical context to the theoretical discussion. This enhancement bridges the gap between research and application, which is essential for readers in both academic and industry settings. Overall, the authors have made substantial and meaningful revisions that have elevated the quality of the manuscript. The paper now offers a well-structured, methodologically sound, and insightful contribution to the field of mobile payment adoption research. ✅ I am pleased to recommend this manuscript for acceptance in its current form. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Financial Technology Adoption, Entrepreneurial Finance, Start-up Entrepreneurship, Sustainability. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Estiyanti NM. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185656.r407430 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2#referee-response-407430 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 31 Mar 2025 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Hidayat W. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r394216 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v1#referee-response-394216 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 28 Jul 2025 Wahyu Hidayat , Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, West Java, Indonesia Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r394216 1. The authors did not conduct a bias test to assess each selected article based on the PRISMA flow, so the method used to select the quality of the chosen journals cannot be justified. 2. As LSR cannot be fully conducted ... Continue reading READ ALL 1. The authors did not conduct a bias test to assess each selected article based on the PRISMA flow, so the method used to select the quality of the chosen journals cannot be justified. 2. As LSR cannot be fully conducted because there is no bias test method that has not been performed for the selected articles, but if there is already a bias test method for the articles, then LSR can be conducted. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Partly Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Herbal medicine, oral medicine, infection and immunogenetics I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Hidayat W. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r394216 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v1#referee-response-394216 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 09 Aug 2025 JHOANY ALEJANDRO VALENCIA ARIAS , School of Industrial Engineering, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, 14001, Peru 09 Aug 2025 Author Response We would like to thank the reviewer for their valuable observations, which have allowed us to strengthen the methodological transparency of our study. Regarding the first comment, we understand the ... Continue reading We would like to thank the reviewer for their valuable observations, which have allowed us to strengthen the methodological transparency of our study. Regarding the first comment, we understand the concern about the justification of the quality assessment method applied to the selected studies. We clarify that the PRISMA flow diagram was used strictly to document and guide the selection process of studies, but not as the instrument for assessing methodological quality. To evaluate the risk of bias and overall methodological rigor of each included article, we employed the AMSTAR-2 framework, a widely recognized tool designed specifically for the critical appraisal of systematic reviews. As shown in Table 1, this assessment included dimensions such as the justification of inclusion criteria, the transparency and scope of the search strategy, the identification of potential sources of bias, and the evaluation of heterogeneity and publication bias. Each article was independently rated across these dimensions to provide a comprehensive quality profile. In response to the second comment, we confirm that a bias assessment method was indeed applied, using the AMSTAR-2 criteria to enable a structured and replicable approach to the evaluation of risk of bias. This allowed us to classify the methodological quality of the 63 studies and to identify both the strengths and limitations of the current literature on mobile payment adoption. We therefore consider that the study meets the minimum criteria required to be framed as a Living Systematic Review (LSR), as it includes a robust and transparent quality appraisal protocol that can be updated and expanded over time. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify these aspects and have revised the manuscript to make this information more explicit. We would like to thank the reviewer for their valuable observations, which have allowed us to strengthen the methodological transparency of our study. Regarding the first comment, we understand the concern about the justification of the quality assessment method applied to the selected studies. We clarify that the PRISMA flow diagram was used strictly to document and guide the selection process of studies, but not as the instrument for assessing methodological quality. To evaluate the risk of bias and overall methodological rigor of each included article, we employed the AMSTAR-2 framework, a widely recognized tool designed specifically for the critical appraisal of systematic reviews. As shown in Table 1, this assessment included dimensions such as the justification of inclusion criteria, the transparency and scope of the search strategy, the identification of potential sources of bias, and the evaluation of heterogeneity and publication bias. Each article was independently rated across these dimensions to provide a comprehensive quality profile. In response to the second comment, we confirm that a bias assessment method was indeed applied, using the AMSTAR-2 criteria to enable a structured and replicable approach to the evaluation of risk of bias. This allowed us to classify the methodological quality of the 63 studies and to identify both the strengths and limitations of the current literature on mobile payment adoption. We therefore consider that the study meets the minimum criteria required to be framed as a Living Systematic Review (LSR), as it includes a robust and transparent quality appraisal protocol that can be updated and expanded over time. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify these aspects and have revised the manuscript to make this information more explicit. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 09 Aug 2025 JHOANY ALEJANDRO VALENCIA ARIAS , School of Industrial Engineering, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, 14001, Peru 09 Aug 2025 Author Response We would like to thank the reviewer for their valuable observations, which have allowed us to strengthen the methodological transparency of our study. Regarding the first comment, we understand the ... Continue reading We would like to thank the reviewer for their valuable observations, which have allowed us to strengthen the methodological transparency of our study. Regarding the first comment, we understand the concern about the justification of the quality assessment method applied to the selected studies. We clarify that the PRISMA flow diagram was used strictly to document and guide the selection process of studies, but not as the instrument for assessing methodological quality. To evaluate the risk of bias and overall methodological rigor of each included article, we employed the AMSTAR-2 framework, a widely recognized tool designed specifically for the critical appraisal of systematic reviews. As shown in Table 1, this assessment included dimensions such as the justification of inclusion criteria, the transparency and scope of the search strategy, the identification of potential sources of bias, and the evaluation of heterogeneity and publication bias. Each article was independently rated across these dimensions to provide a comprehensive quality profile. In response to the second comment, we confirm that a bias assessment method was indeed applied, using the AMSTAR-2 criteria to enable a structured and replicable approach to the evaluation of risk of bias. This allowed us to classify the methodological quality of the 63 studies and to identify both the strengths and limitations of the current literature on mobile payment adoption. We therefore consider that the study meets the minimum criteria required to be framed as a Living Systematic Review (LSR), as it includes a robust and transparent quality appraisal protocol that can be updated and expanded over time. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify these aspects and have revised the manuscript to make this information more explicit. We would like to thank the reviewer for their valuable observations, which have allowed us to strengthen the methodological transparency of our study. Regarding the first comment, we understand the concern about the justification of the quality assessment method applied to the selected studies. We clarify that the PRISMA flow diagram was used strictly to document and guide the selection process of studies, but not as the instrument for assessing methodological quality. To evaluate the risk of bias and overall methodological rigor of each included article, we employed the AMSTAR-2 framework, a widely recognized tool designed specifically for the critical appraisal of systematic reviews. As shown in Table 1, this assessment included dimensions such as the justification of inclusion criteria, the transparency and scope of the search strategy, the identification of potential sources of bias, and the evaluation of heterogeneity and publication bias. Each article was independently rated across these dimensions to provide a comprehensive quality profile. In response to the second comment, we confirm that a bias assessment method was indeed applied, using the AMSTAR-2 criteria to enable a structured and replicable approach to the evaluation of risk of bias. This allowed us to classify the methodological quality of the 63 studies and to identify both the strengths and limitations of the current literature on mobile payment adoption. We therefore consider that the study meets the minimum criteria required to be framed as a Living Systematic Review (LSR), as it includes a robust and transparent quality appraisal protocol that can be updated and expanded over time. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify these aspects and have revised the manuscript to make this information more explicit. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Estiyanti NM. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r391989 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v1#referee-response-391989 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 23 Jul 2025 Ni Made Estiyanti , Primakara University, Bali, Indonesia Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r391989 This article explores the integration of mobile payments into the realm of research, with the objective of elucidating the technological, socio-economic, and cultural factors that influence user experience and satisfaction, thereby attracting a greater number of users. A systematic ... Continue reading READ ALL This article explores the integration of mobile payments into the realm of research, with the objective of elucidating the technological, socio-economic, and cultural factors that influence user experience and satisfaction, thereby attracting a greater number of users. A systematic literature review based on the PRISMA 2020 framework was conducted to select 63 documents from Scopus and WoS. This review explored research trends in mobile payment adoption. The most frequently utilized models for this analysis are the extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the extended Unified Theory of Acceptance of Technology (UTAUT). The most salient variables in this study are social influence, perceived security, perceived risk, trust, and perceived benefits. Consequently, it is recommended that future research agendas prioritize subjects such as biometric authentication, payment flexibility, and contactless payments. From a business perspective, there is an emphasis on the development of more intuitive user interfaces. This article provides a valuable roadmap for future research, particularly in identifying underexplored variables. The topic of this research is highly relevant and timely, particularly in light of the rapid advancements in digital finance and payment systems. The article is well-structured and clearly presented, contributing to its overall readability and coherence. The methodology employed is appropriate and provides meaningful insights for both theoretical development and practical application in the field. Nevertheless, with minor revisions, there are several areas that require further clarification and refinement in order to enhance the clarity, accuracy, and academic rigor of the paper. Below are some key points identified in the article that could benefit from improvement: 1) Inclusion of Database Search Timeframe The article does not specify the timeframe during which the database searches were conducted in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). This information is crucial, as the number of publications indexed in these databases evolves continuously, potentially influencing the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the literature analysis. To ensure consistency and reproducibility, it is recommended that future studies clearly report the exact dates of database searches and conduct them simultaneously in both Scopus and WoS to minimize discrepancies and maintain methodological rigor. 2) Inclusion of References as Scientific Evidence Several statements presented in the introduction section appear to reflect opinions or conclusions that are not supported by appropriate scholarly references. It is strongly recommended to ensure that all such assertions be accompanied by relevant citations from credible academic sources. Incorporating references will strengthen the validity and credibility of the claims made, grounding them in existing scientific literature and enhancing the overall academic rigor of the paper. 3) Clarity Regarding the Use of Analytical Tools This article does mention the use of Microsoft Excel and VOSViewer; however, the nature of the analysis and the specific analytical methods used remain unclear. For example, in Figure 7, what analytical approach was used, and what tools were utilized? Furthermore, Figure 8 suggests that the visualization is the result of burst analysis using the Scitespace tool. This statement is speculative, as the source material does not explicitly address this point. Clear explanations and elaborations are essential. To enhance methodological transparency and reproducibility, this study should provide a clear mapping between the tools used and the specific analyses conducted. 4) Clarify the PRISMA Flow Diagram The stages in the PRISMA method have already been explained in the section on inclusion and exclusion criteria. However, it is still unclear to me what the criteria are for “report not retrievable = 305” and also for “record excluded = 167.” It would be better to present the criteria in the PRISMA flow diagram. 5) Discussion on Limited Practical Case Studies The number of practical case studies employed to illustrate theoretical insights is limited. It is imperative to provide concrete examples of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) No Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Financial Technology Adoption, Entrepreneurial Finance, Start-up Entrepreneurship, Sustainability. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Estiyanti NM. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r391989 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v1#referee-response-391989 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 09 Aug 2025 JHOANY ALEJANDRO VALENCIA ARIAS , School of Industrial Engineering, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, 14001, Peru 09 Aug 2025 Author Response We thank the reviewer and the editorial team for their invaluable contributions to the rigor of the article. Below, we provide a point-by-point response: Comment : 1) Inclusion of Database ... Continue reading We thank the reviewer and the editorial team for their invaluable contributions to the rigor of the article. Below, we provide a point-by-point response: Comment : 1) Inclusion of Database Search Timeframe The article does not specify the timeframe during which the database searches were conducted in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). This information is crucial, as the number of publications indexed in these databases evolves continuously, potentially influencing the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the literature analysis. To ensure consistency and reproducibility, it is recommended that future studies clearly report the exact dates of database searches and conduct them simultaneously in both Scopus and WoS to minimize discrepancies and maintain methodological rigor. Response : The search date was explicitly added. Comment : 2) Inclusion of References as Scientific Evidence Several statements presented in the introduction section appear to reflect opinions or conclusions that are not supported by appropriate scholarly references. It is strongly recommended to ensure that all such assertions be accompanied by relevant citations from credible academic sources. Incorporating references will strengthen the validity and credibility of the claims made, grounding them in existing scientific literature and enhancing the overall academic rigor of the paper. Response : The introduction was thoroughly reviewed, and updated references were added. Comment : 3) Clarity Regarding the Use of Analytical Tools This article does mention the use of Microsoft Excel and VOSViewer; however, the nature of the analysis and the specific analytical methods used remain unclear. For example, in Figure 7, what analytical approach was used, and what tools were utilized? Furthermore, Figure 8 suggests that the visualization is the result of burst analysis using the Scitespace tool. This statement is speculative, as the source material does not explicitly address this point. Clear explanations and elaborations are essential. To enhance methodological transparency and reproducibility, this study should provide a clear mapping between the tools used and the specific analyses conducted. Response : The text already specified what type of analysis was performed with each tool, and the information represented in the figures was clarified. Comment : 4) Clarify the PRISMA Flow Diagram The stages in the PRISMA method have already been explained in the section on inclusion and exclusion criteria. However, it is still unclear to me what the criteria are for “report not retrievable = 305” and also for “record excluded = 167.” It would be better to present the criteria in the PRISMA flow diagram. Response : Specific exclusion criteria were added as an explanatory note within the PRISMA diagram for greater clarity. Comment : 5) Discussion on Limited Practical Case Studies The number of practical case studies employed to illustrate theoretical insights is limited. It is imperative to provide concrete examples of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts. Response : Two real-life cases of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts were incorporated, strengthening the theoretical discussion. We thank the reviewer and the editorial team for their invaluable contributions to the rigor of the article. Below, we provide a point-by-point response: Comment : 1) Inclusion of Database Search Timeframe The article does not specify the timeframe during which the database searches were conducted in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). This information is crucial, as the number of publications indexed in these databases evolves continuously, potentially influencing the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the literature analysis. To ensure consistency and reproducibility, it is recommended that future studies clearly report the exact dates of database searches and conduct them simultaneously in both Scopus and WoS to minimize discrepancies and maintain methodological rigor. Response : The search date was explicitly added. Comment : 2) Inclusion of References as Scientific Evidence Several statements presented in the introduction section appear to reflect opinions or conclusions that are not supported by appropriate scholarly references. It is strongly recommended to ensure that all such assertions be accompanied by relevant citations from credible academic sources. Incorporating references will strengthen the validity and credibility of the claims made, grounding them in existing scientific literature and enhancing the overall academic rigor of the paper. Response : The introduction was thoroughly reviewed, and updated references were added. Comment : 3) Clarity Regarding the Use of Analytical Tools This article does mention the use of Microsoft Excel and VOSViewer; however, the nature of the analysis and the specific analytical methods used remain unclear. For example, in Figure 7, what analytical approach was used, and what tools were utilized? Furthermore, Figure 8 suggests that the visualization is the result of burst analysis using the Scitespace tool. This statement is speculative, as the source material does not explicitly address this point. Clear explanations and elaborations are essential. To enhance methodological transparency and reproducibility, this study should provide a clear mapping between the tools used and the specific analyses conducted. Response : The text already specified what type of analysis was performed with each tool, and the information represented in the figures was clarified. Comment : 4) Clarify the PRISMA Flow Diagram The stages in the PRISMA method have already been explained in the section on inclusion and exclusion criteria. However, it is still unclear to me what the criteria are for “report not retrievable = 305” and also for “record excluded = 167.” It would be better to present the criteria in the PRISMA flow diagram. Response : Specific exclusion criteria were added as an explanatory note within the PRISMA diagram for greater clarity. Comment : 5) Discussion on Limited Practical Case Studies The number of practical case studies employed to illustrate theoretical insights is limited. It is imperative to provide concrete examples of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts. Response : Two real-life cases of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts were incorporated, strengthening the theoretical discussion. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 09 Aug 2025 JHOANY ALEJANDRO VALENCIA ARIAS , School of Industrial Engineering, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, 14001, Peru 09 Aug 2025 Author Response We thank the reviewer and the editorial team for their invaluable contributions to the rigor of the article. Below, we provide a point-by-point response: Comment : 1) Inclusion of Database ... Continue reading We thank the reviewer and the editorial team for their invaluable contributions to the rigor of the article. Below, we provide a point-by-point response: Comment : 1) Inclusion of Database Search Timeframe The article does not specify the timeframe during which the database searches were conducted in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). This information is crucial, as the number of publications indexed in these databases evolves continuously, potentially influencing the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the literature analysis. To ensure consistency and reproducibility, it is recommended that future studies clearly report the exact dates of database searches and conduct them simultaneously in both Scopus and WoS to minimize discrepancies and maintain methodological rigor. Response : The search date was explicitly added. Comment : 2) Inclusion of References as Scientific Evidence Several statements presented in the introduction section appear to reflect opinions or conclusions that are not supported by appropriate scholarly references. It is strongly recommended to ensure that all such assertions be accompanied by relevant citations from credible academic sources. Incorporating references will strengthen the validity and credibility of the claims made, grounding them in existing scientific literature and enhancing the overall academic rigor of the paper. Response : The introduction was thoroughly reviewed, and updated references were added. Comment : 3) Clarity Regarding the Use of Analytical Tools This article does mention the use of Microsoft Excel and VOSViewer; however, the nature of the analysis and the specific analytical methods used remain unclear. For example, in Figure 7, what analytical approach was used, and what tools were utilized? Furthermore, Figure 8 suggests that the visualization is the result of burst analysis using the Scitespace tool. This statement is speculative, as the source material does not explicitly address this point. Clear explanations and elaborations are essential. To enhance methodological transparency and reproducibility, this study should provide a clear mapping between the tools used and the specific analyses conducted. Response : The text already specified what type of analysis was performed with each tool, and the information represented in the figures was clarified. Comment : 4) Clarify the PRISMA Flow Diagram The stages in the PRISMA method have already been explained in the section on inclusion and exclusion criteria. However, it is still unclear to me what the criteria are for “report not retrievable = 305” and also for “record excluded = 167.” It would be better to present the criteria in the PRISMA flow diagram. Response : Specific exclusion criteria were added as an explanatory note within the PRISMA diagram for greater clarity. Comment : 5) Discussion on Limited Practical Case Studies The number of practical case studies employed to illustrate theoretical insights is limited. It is imperative to provide concrete examples of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts. Response : Two real-life cases of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts were incorporated, strengthening the theoretical discussion. We thank the reviewer and the editorial team for their invaluable contributions to the rigor of the article. Below, we provide a point-by-point response: Comment : 1) Inclusion of Database Search Timeframe The article does not specify the timeframe during which the database searches were conducted in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). This information is crucial, as the number of publications indexed in these databases evolves continuously, potentially influencing the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the literature analysis. To ensure consistency and reproducibility, it is recommended that future studies clearly report the exact dates of database searches and conduct them simultaneously in both Scopus and WoS to minimize discrepancies and maintain methodological rigor. Response : The search date was explicitly added. Comment : 2) Inclusion of References as Scientific Evidence Several statements presented in the introduction section appear to reflect opinions or conclusions that are not supported by appropriate scholarly references. It is strongly recommended to ensure that all such assertions be accompanied by relevant citations from credible academic sources. Incorporating references will strengthen the validity and credibility of the claims made, grounding them in existing scientific literature and enhancing the overall academic rigor of the paper. Response : The introduction was thoroughly reviewed, and updated references were added. Comment : 3) Clarity Regarding the Use of Analytical Tools This article does mention the use of Microsoft Excel and VOSViewer; however, the nature of the analysis and the specific analytical methods used remain unclear. For example, in Figure 7, what analytical approach was used, and what tools were utilized? Furthermore, Figure 8 suggests that the visualization is the result of burst analysis using the Scitespace tool. This statement is speculative, as the source material does not explicitly address this point. Clear explanations and elaborations are essential. To enhance methodological transparency and reproducibility, this study should provide a clear mapping between the tools used and the specific analyses conducted. Response : The text already specified what type of analysis was performed with each tool, and the information represented in the figures was clarified. Comment : 4) Clarify the PRISMA Flow Diagram The stages in the PRISMA method have already been explained in the section on inclusion and exclusion criteria. However, it is still unclear to me what the criteria are for “report not retrievable = 305” and also for “record excluded = 167.” It would be better to present the criteria in the PRISMA flow diagram. Response : Specific exclusion criteria were added as an explanatory note within the PRISMA diagram for greater clarity. Comment : 5) Discussion on Limited Practical Case Studies The number of practical case studies employed to illustrate theoretical insights is limited. It is imperative to provide concrete examples of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts. Response : Two real-life cases of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts were incorporated, strengthening the theoretical discussion. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Bhuiyan MRI. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r394215 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v1#referee-response-394215 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 30 Jun 2025 Mohammad Rakibul Islam Bhuiyan , Begum Rokeya University, Rangpur, Bangladesh Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r394215 This manuscript offers a valuable bibliometric and systematic review of mobile payment adoption literature through a PRISMA-guided approach, identifying key trends, theories (e.g., UTAUT, TAM), and future research directions. The structure is clear and the topic is timely given the ... Continue reading READ ALL This manuscript offers a valuable bibliometric and systematic review of mobile payment adoption literature through a PRISMA-guided approach, identifying key trends, theories (e.g., UTAUT, TAM), and future research directions. The structure is clear and the topic is timely given the rapid expansion of digital finance. However, several critical improvements are needed to strengthen academic rigor, enhance clarity, and update the manuscript’s scholarly relevance. Major Comments and Suggestions 1. Update Literature Coverage Issue : Although the scope spans from 2004 to 2023, many of the included references and patterns emphasize publications from 2016–2021. Yet new developments—like biometric authentication and Web3 applications—have emerged strongly in 2024–2025. Recommendation : Update the literature search to extend through late 2024 , capturing key recent studies (e.g., advances in contactless payments, super-apps in emerging markets). Ensure the final selection reflects the most current studies , possibly adjusting inclusion criteria to i) recent top-tier journal papers or ii) novel technologies in mobile finance. 2. Clarify Methodology and PRISMA Flow Issue : The PRISMA flow is mentioned but specific numbers (e.g., initial hits, duplicates removed, exclusions) are unclear. Recommendation : Present a PRISMA flowchart in the main text or supplementary materials with explicit counts for each filtering stage. Provide criteria for scoring and removing duplicates or irrelevant articles to increase transparency. 3. Refine Coding and Thematic Analysis Issue : While TAM/UTAUT usage is highlighted, thematic coding methodology (category definitions, inter-rater reliability) is not clearly described. Recommendation : Explain the coding process : how themes/categories were defined, who conducted the coding, and whether reliability was assessed (e.g., Cohen’s kappa). Discuss how qualitative interpretation mapped keywords to theoretical models like trust, social influence, or effort expectancy. 4. Enhance Visualizations and Narrative Flow Issue : Figures such as keyword evolution (Fig. 7) and thematic agenda (Fig. 8) contain many items with unclear visual differentiation. Recommendation : Improve figure clarity through better color schemes , simplified legends, and highlighted trends. In the text, explicitly interpret each figure , guiding the reader through the most salient keywords and emerging themes rather than just referencing them. 5. Balance Research Gaps and Practical Relevance Issue : Table 3 and the agenda are comprehensive but lack prioritization and alignment with practice. Recommendation : Distinguish high-priority gaps (e.g., adoption in the context of financial inclusion, data privacy implications, regulatory frameworks) vs. exploratory ones. Connect these gaps to real-world implications —for policymakers, mobile platform designers, or regulators in digital finance. 6. Strengthen Limitations and Future Work Issue : The limitations of the bibliometric method are briefly noted, but there is no discussion of possible biases (e.g., English-language only, citation lag). Recommendation : Expand limitations to cover language bias, bibliometric time-lag skew, and potential database (Scopus/WoS) coverage issues. Suggest follow-up studies combining qualitative interviews , thematic deep-dives, or emerging market case studies to triangulate findings. Minor Suggestions Provide descriptive table captions , especially where acronyms appear (e.g., clarify TAM, UTAUT). Check consistency in referencing formatting and ensure DOI inclusion throughout. Consider adding an acronym glossary for ease of reading. Note any funding or open data sources for replication transparency. Concluding Remarks This manuscript addresses an important and evolving research area. With major revisions focused on updating literature, clarifying methods, refining narrative clarity, and strengthening the connection to practice, it could meaningfully advance research in mobile payment adoption which is acceptable with major revisions. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? No Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? No If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) No Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Economics of Information Systems, Digital Payment Technology, Advanced Manufacturing, Information Privacy & Security, Industry 4.0 I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Bhuiyan MRI. Reviewer Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r394215 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v1#referee-response-394215 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 31 Mar 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 3 Version 2 (revision) 20 Aug 25 read read Version 1 31 Mar 25 read read read Mohammad Rakibul Islam Bhuiyan , Begum Rokeya University, Rangpur, Bangladesh Lisa Mani , Shahjalal University of Science and Technology School of Management and Business Administration (Ringgold ID: 309531), Sylhet, Bangladesh Ni Made Estiyanti , Primakara University, Bali, Indonesia Wahyu Hidayat , Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Bhuiyan M et al. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 05 Sep 2025 | for Version 2 Mohammad Rakibul Islam Bhuiyan , Begum Rokeya University, Rangpur, Bangladesh Lisa Mani , Finance and Banking, Shahjalal University of Science and Technology School of Management and Business Administration (Ringgold ID: 309531), Sylhet, Sylhet, Bangladesh 0 Views copyright © 2025 Bhuiyan M et al. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thank you for revision. My decision is to accept this paper without any reservation. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Economics of Information Systems, Digital Payment Technology, Advanced Manufacturing, Information Privacy & Security, Industry 4.0 We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Bhuiyan MRI and Mani L. Peer Review Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185656.r407431) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2#referee-response-407431 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Estiyanti N. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 02 Sep 2025 | for Version 2 Ni Made Estiyanti , Primakara University, Bali, Indonesia 0 Views copyright © 2025 Estiyanti N. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Report: Response to Author Revisions I appreciate the authors’ careful and thorough response to my initial review comments. The revised manuscript has been significantly improved in terms of methodological clarity, academic rigor, and analytical transparency. The authors have successfully addressed all the key points I raised: 1. Database Search Timeframe: The inclusion of the exact dates for the database searches in Scopus and Web of Science enhances the reproducibility of the study and strengthens the methodological foundation. This is a valuable addition. 2. Inclusion of Scholarly References: The revised introduction now includes updated and relevant citations that support the key claims. This greatly improves the scientific credibility of the paper and grounds the discussion in existing literature. 3. Clarity of Analytical Tools: The clarification regarding the use of Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace — including their specific roles in the analysis (e.g., burst detection in Figure 8 using CiteSpace) — has significantly improved the transparency and rigor of the methodological section. I appreciate the detailed mapping provided. 4. PRISMA Flow Diagram: The updated PRISMA diagram, with clear explanations for “report not retrievable” and “record excluded,” now provides a more transparent and comprehensive view of the screening process. This strengthens the trustworthiness of the literature selection. 5. Practical Case Studies: The inclusion of real-world examples of successful mobile payment systems adds valuable practical context to the theoretical discussion. This enhancement bridges the gap between research and application, which is essential for readers in both academic and industry settings. Overall, the authors have made substantial and meaningful revisions that have elevated the quality of the manuscript. The paper now offers a well-structured, methodologically sound, and insightful contribution to the field of mobile payment adoption research. ✅ I am pleased to recommend this manuscript for acceptance in its current form. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Financial Technology Adoption, Entrepreneurial Finance, Start-up Entrepreneurship, Sustainability. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Estiyanti NM. Peer Review Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185656.r407430) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2#referee-response-407430 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Hidayat W. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 28 Jul 2025 | for Version 1 Wahyu Hidayat , Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, West Java, Indonesia 0 Views copyright © 2025 Hidayat W. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions 1. The authors did not conduct a bias test to assess each selected article based on the PRISMA flow, so the method used to select the quality of the chosen journals cannot be justified. 2. As LSR cannot be fully conducted because there is no bias test method that has not been performed for the selected articles, but if there is already a bias test method for the articles, then LSR can be conducted. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Partly Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Herbal medicine, oral medicine, infection and immunogenetics I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 09 Aug 2025 JHOANY ALEJANDRO VALENCIA ARIAS, School of Industrial Engineering, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, 14001, Peru We would like to thank the reviewer for their valuable observations, which have allowed us to strengthen the methodological transparency of our study. Regarding the first comment, we understand the concern about the justification of the quality assessment method applied to the selected studies. We clarify that the PRISMA flow diagram was used strictly to document and guide the selection process of studies, but not as the instrument for assessing methodological quality. To evaluate the risk of bias and overall methodological rigor of each included article, we employed the AMSTAR-2 framework, a widely recognized tool designed specifically for the critical appraisal of systematic reviews. As shown in Table 1, this assessment included dimensions such as the justification of inclusion criteria, the transparency and scope of the search strategy, the identification of potential sources of bias, and the evaluation of heterogeneity and publication bias. Each article was independently rated across these dimensions to provide a comprehensive quality profile. In response to the second comment, we confirm that a bias assessment method was indeed applied, using the AMSTAR-2 criteria to enable a structured and replicable approach to the evaluation of risk of bias. This allowed us to classify the methodological quality of the 63 studies and to identify both the strengths and limitations of the current literature on mobile payment adoption. We therefore consider that the study meets the minimum criteria required to be framed as a Living Systematic Review (LSR), as it includes a robust and transparent quality appraisal protocol that can be updated and expanded over time. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify these aspects and have revised the manuscript to make this information more explicit. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Hidayat W. Peer Review Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r394216) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v1#referee-response-394216 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Estiyanti N. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 23 Jul 2025 | for Version 1 Ni Made Estiyanti , Primakara University, Bali, Indonesia 0 Views copyright © 2025 Estiyanti N. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This article explores the integration of mobile payments into the realm of research, with the objective of elucidating the technological, socio-economic, and cultural factors that influence user experience and satisfaction, thereby attracting a greater number of users. A systematic literature review based on the PRISMA 2020 framework was conducted to select 63 documents from Scopus and WoS. This review explored research trends in mobile payment adoption. The most frequently utilized models for this analysis are the extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the extended Unified Theory of Acceptance of Technology (UTAUT). The most salient variables in this study are social influence, perceived security, perceived risk, trust, and perceived benefits. Consequently, it is recommended that future research agendas prioritize subjects such as biometric authentication, payment flexibility, and contactless payments. From a business perspective, there is an emphasis on the development of more intuitive user interfaces. This article provides a valuable roadmap for future research, particularly in identifying underexplored variables. The topic of this research is highly relevant and timely, particularly in light of the rapid advancements in digital finance and payment systems. The article is well-structured and clearly presented, contributing to its overall readability and coherence. The methodology employed is appropriate and provides meaningful insights for both theoretical development and practical application in the field. Nevertheless, with minor revisions, there are several areas that require further clarification and refinement in order to enhance the clarity, accuracy, and academic rigor of the paper. Below are some key points identified in the article that could benefit from improvement: 1) Inclusion of Database Search Timeframe The article does not specify the timeframe during which the database searches were conducted in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). This information is crucial, as the number of publications indexed in these databases evolves continuously, potentially influencing the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the literature analysis. To ensure consistency and reproducibility, it is recommended that future studies clearly report the exact dates of database searches and conduct them simultaneously in both Scopus and WoS to minimize discrepancies and maintain methodological rigor. 2) Inclusion of References as Scientific Evidence Several statements presented in the introduction section appear to reflect opinions or conclusions that are not supported by appropriate scholarly references. It is strongly recommended to ensure that all such assertions be accompanied by relevant citations from credible academic sources. Incorporating references will strengthen the validity and credibility of the claims made, grounding them in existing scientific literature and enhancing the overall academic rigor of the paper. 3) Clarity Regarding the Use of Analytical Tools This article does mention the use of Microsoft Excel and VOSViewer; however, the nature of the analysis and the specific analytical methods used remain unclear. For example, in Figure 7, what analytical approach was used, and what tools were utilized? Furthermore, Figure 8 suggests that the visualization is the result of burst analysis using the Scitespace tool. This statement is speculative, as the source material does not explicitly address this point. Clear explanations and elaborations are essential. To enhance methodological transparency and reproducibility, this study should provide a clear mapping between the tools used and the specific analyses conducted. 4) Clarify the PRISMA Flow Diagram The stages in the PRISMA method have already been explained in the section on inclusion and exclusion criteria. However, it is still unclear to me what the criteria are for “report not retrievable = 305” and also for “record excluded = 167.” It would be better to present the criteria in the PRISMA flow diagram. 5) Discussion on Limited Practical Case Studies The number of practical case studies employed to illustrate theoretical insights is limited. It is imperative to provide concrete examples of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) No Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Financial Technology Adoption, Entrepreneurial Finance, Start-up Entrepreneurship, Sustainability. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 09 Aug 2025 JHOANY ALEJANDRO VALENCIA ARIAS, School of Industrial Engineering, Universidad Senor de Sipan, Chiclayo, 14001, Peru We thank the reviewer and the editorial team for their invaluable contributions to the rigor of the article. Below, we provide a point-by-point response: Comment : 1) Inclusion of Database Search Timeframe The article does not specify the timeframe during which the database searches were conducted in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). This information is crucial, as the number of publications indexed in these databases evolves continuously, potentially influencing the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the literature analysis. To ensure consistency and reproducibility, it is recommended that future studies clearly report the exact dates of database searches and conduct them simultaneously in both Scopus and WoS to minimize discrepancies and maintain methodological rigor. Response : The search date was explicitly added. Comment : 2) Inclusion of References as Scientific Evidence Several statements presented in the introduction section appear to reflect opinions or conclusions that are not supported by appropriate scholarly references. It is strongly recommended to ensure that all such assertions be accompanied by relevant citations from credible academic sources. Incorporating references will strengthen the validity and credibility of the claims made, grounding them in existing scientific literature and enhancing the overall academic rigor of the paper. Response : The introduction was thoroughly reviewed, and updated references were added. Comment : 3) Clarity Regarding the Use of Analytical Tools This article does mention the use of Microsoft Excel and VOSViewer; however, the nature of the analysis and the specific analytical methods used remain unclear. For example, in Figure 7, what analytical approach was used, and what tools were utilized? Furthermore, Figure 8 suggests that the visualization is the result of burst analysis using the Scitespace tool. This statement is speculative, as the source material does not explicitly address this point. Clear explanations and elaborations are essential. To enhance methodological transparency and reproducibility, this study should provide a clear mapping between the tools used and the specific analyses conducted. Response : The text already specified what type of analysis was performed with each tool, and the information represented in the figures was clarified. Comment : 4) Clarify the PRISMA Flow Diagram The stages in the PRISMA method have already been explained in the section on inclusion and exclusion criteria. However, it is still unclear to me what the criteria are for “report not retrievable = 305” and also for “record excluded = 167.” It would be better to present the criteria in the PRISMA flow diagram. Response : Specific exclusion criteria were added as an explanatory note within the PRISMA diagram for greater clarity. Comment : 5) Discussion on Limited Practical Case Studies The number of practical case studies employed to illustrate theoretical insights is limited. It is imperative to provide concrete examples of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts. Response : Two real-life cases of successful mobile payment systems in diverse contexts were incorporated, strengthening the theoretical discussion. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Estiyanti NM. Peer Review Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r391989) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v1#referee-response-391989 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Bhuiyan M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 30 Jun 2025 | for Version 1 Mohammad Rakibul Islam Bhuiyan , Begum Rokeya University, Rangpur, Bangladesh 0 Views copyright © 2025 Bhuiyan M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This manuscript offers a valuable bibliometric and systematic review of mobile payment adoption literature through a PRISMA-guided approach, identifying key trends, theories (e.g., UTAUT, TAM), and future research directions. The structure is clear and the topic is timely given the rapid expansion of digital finance. However, several critical improvements are needed to strengthen academic rigor, enhance clarity, and update the manuscript’s scholarly relevance. Major Comments and Suggestions 1. Update Literature Coverage Issue : Although the scope spans from 2004 to 2023, many of the included references and patterns emphasize publications from 2016–2021. Yet new developments—like biometric authentication and Web3 applications—have emerged strongly in 2024–2025. Recommendation : Update the literature search to extend through late 2024 , capturing key recent studies (e.g., advances in contactless payments, super-apps in emerging markets). Ensure the final selection reflects the most current studies , possibly adjusting inclusion criteria to i) recent top-tier journal papers or ii) novel technologies in mobile finance. 2. Clarify Methodology and PRISMA Flow Issue : The PRISMA flow is mentioned but specific numbers (e.g., initial hits, duplicates removed, exclusions) are unclear. Recommendation : Present a PRISMA flowchart in the main text or supplementary materials with explicit counts for each filtering stage. Provide criteria for scoring and removing duplicates or irrelevant articles to increase transparency. 3. Refine Coding and Thematic Analysis Issue : While TAM/UTAUT usage is highlighted, thematic coding methodology (category definitions, inter-rater reliability) is not clearly described. Recommendation : Explain the coding process : how themes/categories were defined, who conducted the coding, and whether reliability was assessed (e.g., Cohen’s kappa). Discuss how qualitative interpretation mapped keywords to theoretical models like trust, social influence, or effort expectancy. 4. Enhance Visualizations and Narrative Flow Issue : Figures such as keyword evolution (Fig. 7) and thematic agenda (Fig. 8) contain many items with unclear visual differentiation. Recommendation : Improve figure clarity through better color schemes , simplified legends, and highlighted trends. In the text, explicitly interpret each figure , guiding the reader through the most salient keywords and emerging themes rather than just referencing them. 5. Balance Research Gaps and Practical Relevance Issue : Table 3 and the agenda are comprehensive but lack prioritization and alignment with practice. Recommendation : Distinguish high-priority gaps (e.g., adoption in the context of financial inclusion, data privacy implications, regulatory frameworks) vs. exploratory ones. Connect these gaps to real-world implications —for policymakers, mobile platform designers, or regulators in digital finance. 6. Strengthen Limitations and Future Work Issue : The limitations of the bibliometric method are briefly noted, but there is no discussion of possible biases (e.g., English-language only, citation lag). Recommendation : Expand limitations to cover language bias, bibliometric time-lag skew, and potential database (Scopus/WoS) coverage issues. Suggest follow-up studies combining qualitative interviews , thematic deep-dives, or emerging market case studies to triangulate findings. Minor Suggestions Provide descriptive table captions , especially where acronyms appear (e.g., clarify TAM, UTAUT). Check consistency in referencing formatting and ensure DOI inclusion throughout. Consider adding an acronym glossary for ease of reading. Note any funding or open data sources for replication transparency. Concluding Remarks This manuscript addresses an important and evolving research area. With major revisions focused on updating literature, clarifying methods, refining narrative clarity, and strengthening the connection to practice, it could meaningfully advance research in mobile payment adoption which is acceptable with major revisions. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? No Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? No If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) No Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Economics of Information Systems, Digital Payment Technology, Advanced Manufacturing, Information Privacy & Security, Industry 4.0 I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Bhuiyan MRI. Peer Review Report For: Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and agenda [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :358 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.175296.r394215) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v1#referee-response-394215 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Research trends in mobile payment adoption:...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Valencia-Arias A et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358", templates : { twitter : "Research trends in mobile payment adoption: Research trends and.... Valencia-Arias A et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/14-358/v2" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/159551/185656") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "185656"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "407430": 6, "407431": 5, "407429": 0, "374797": 0, "374796": 0, "400911": 0, "374799": 0, "374798": 0, "374793": 0, "374792": 0, "374795": 0, "374794": 0, "374801": 0, "374800": 0, "409054": 0, "394207": 0, "409055": 0, "409052": 0, "409053": 0, "409050": 0, "409051": 0, "409049": 0, "394214": 0, "394215": 20, "394212": 0, "394213": 0, "394210": 0, "409058": 0, "394211": 0, "394208": 0, "409056": 0, "394209": 0, "409057": 0, "391981": 0, "391983": 0, "391982": 0, "394216": 12, "391989": 7, "391988": 0, "391990": 0, "391985": 0, "391984": 0, "391987": 0, "391986": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "a2ffa394-7c3f-42d1-9638-744bdb15dc71"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });