IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v18y2025i4p209-d1633875.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Empirical Evaluation of the Technology Acceptance Model for Peer-to-Peer Insurance Adoption: Does Income Really Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Sylvester Senyo Horvey

    (Wits Business School, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg P.O. Box 2193, South Africa)

  • Euphemia Godspower-Akpomiemie

    (Wits Business School, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg P.O. Box 2193, South Africa)

  • Richard Asare Boateng

    (Department of Finance, University of Ghana Business School, University of Ghana, Legon, Accra P.O. Box LG 78, Ghana)

Abstract

One essential component of insurance technology (Insurtech) is peer-to-peer (P2P) insurance, which represents a transformative shift from conventional insurance to digital platforms by fostering community-based risk sharing. This study contributes to the body of knowledge by engaging the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM2) to explore how perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, subjective norms, and perceived trust influence the adoption of P2P insurance, and the moderating influence of income on these relationships. This study used a self-administered survey questionnaire to collect data from short-term insurance clients in South Africa. The survey was analysed using the confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling (SEM) approach. The findings demonstrate that perceived usefulness, ease of use, and subjective norms present a significant positive influence on the adoption of P2P insurance, underscoring the relevance of value, ease of use, and social influence in predicting the adoption of insurance technologies, particularly P2P insurance. However, perceived risk and trust exhibit a positive but statistically insignificant relationship. Additionally, this study reveals that income exerts a significant positive moderating influence on perceived usefulness, ease of use, and subjective norms in affecting P2P adoption, implying that individuals with higher incomes are responsive to these factors when considering P2P insurance. This study highlights the need for policies that support the development of digital infrastructure, as its accessibility and ease of use, including social norms, are predicted as essential drivers of P2P insurance adoption. Also, policymakers should focus on creating a regulatory environment that encourages accountability and openness to P2P insurance.

Suggested Citation

  • Sylvester Senyo Horvey & Euphemia Godspower-Akpomiemie & Richard Asare Boateng, 2025. "An Empirical Evaluation of the Technology Acceptance Model for Peer-to-Peer Insurance Adoption: Does Income Really Matter?," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-24, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:18:y:2025:i:4:p:209-:d:1633875
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/18/4/209/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/18/4/209/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ma, Yu Luen & Ren, Yayuan, 2023. "InsurTech—Promise, threat or hype? Insights from stock market reaction to InsurTech innovation," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Schiopu, Ioana, 2015. "Technology adoption, human capital formation and income differences," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 318-335.
    3. Rainer Alt & Roman Beck & Martin T. Smits, 2018. "FinTech and the transformation of the financial industry," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 28(3), pages 235-243, August.
    4. Abdikerimova, Samal & Feng, Runhuan, 2022. "Peer-to-peer multi-risk insurance and mutual aid," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(2), pages 735-749.
    5. Carlin, Bruce I., 2009. "Strategic price complexity in retail financial markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 278-287, March.
    6. Braun, Alexander & Schreiber, Florian, 2017. "The Current InsurTech Landscape: Business Models and Disruptive Potential," I.VW HSG Schriftenreihe, University of St.Gallen, Institute of Insurance Economics (I.VW-HSG), volume 62, number 62.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Persson, Petra, 2018. "Attention manipulation and information overload," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 78-106, May.
    2. Ferdinand Thies & Sören Wallbach & Michael Wessel & Markus Besler & Alexander Benlian, 2022. "Initial coin offerings and the cryptocurrency hype - the moderating role of exogenous and endogenous signals," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1691-1705, September.
    3. Johannes Johnen, 2019. "Automatic‐renewal contracts with heterogeneous consumer inertia," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 765-786, November.
    4. Mustafa Raza Rabbani & Shahnawaz Khan & Eleftherios I. Thalassinos, 2020. "FinTech, Blockchain and Islamic Finance: An Extensive Literature Review," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(2), pages 65-86.
    5. Iván Sosa Gómez & Óscar Montes Pineda, 2023. "What is an InsurTech? A scientific approach for defining the term," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 26(2), pages 125-173, July.
    6. Florian Deuflhard & Dimitris Georgarakos & Roman Inderst, 2019. "Financial Literacy and Savings Account Returns," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 131-164.
    7. Meier, Volker & Schiopu, Ioana, 2015. "Optimal higher education enrollment and productivity externalities in a two-sector model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-13.
    8. Garcia, Alexandre Schwinden & Gonzaga, André Lucas Moreira, 2024. "How credit unions affect the profitability of Brazilian commercial banks?," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 190-209.
    9. Agarwal, Sumit & Amromin, Gene & Ben-David, Itzhak & Chomsisengphet, Souphala & Evanoff, Douglas D., 2014. "Predatory lending and the subprime crisis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 29-52.
    10. Michele Piccione & Ran Spiegler, 2012. "Price Competition Under Limited Comparability," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(1), pages 97-135.
    11. Feng, Runhuan & Liu, Ming & Zhang, Ning, 2024. "A unified theory of decentralized insurance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 157-178.
    12. Nourallah, Mustafa & Öhman, Peter & Hamati, Samer, 2024. "Financial technology and financial capability: Study of the European Union," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    13. Chaklader, Barnali & Gupta, Brij B. & Panigrahi, Prabin Kumar, 2023. "Analyzing the progress of FINTECH-companies and their integration with new technologies for innovation and entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    14. Denuit, Michel & Dhaene, Jan & Ghossoub, Mario & Robert, Christian Y., 2025. "Comonotonicity and Pareto optimality, with application to collaborative insurance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 1-16.
    15. Øystein Foros & Mai Nguyen-Ones & Frode Steen, 2021. "The Effects of a Day off from Retail Price Competition: Evidence on Consumer Behavior and Firm Performance in Gasoline Retailing," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 49-87, January.
    16. Vladimir Asriyan & Dana Foarta & Victoria Vanasco, 2023. "The Good, the Bad, and the Complex: Product Design with Imperfect Information," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 187-226, May.
    17. Naomi E. Feldman & Bradley J. Ruffle, 2012. "The impact of tax exclusive and inclusive prices on demand," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2012-50, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    18. Sun, Xiaotong & Stasinakis, Charalampos & Sermpinis, Georgios, 2024. "Decentralization illusion in Decentralized Finance: Evidence from tokenized voting in MakerDAO polls," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    19. Foros, Øystein & Nguyen-Ones, Mai, 2021. "Coordinate to obfuscate? The role of prior announcements of recommended prices," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    20. Chioveanu, Ioana & Zhou, Jidong, 2009. "Price Competition and Consumer Confusion," MPRA Paper 17340, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:18:y:2025:i:4:p:209-:d:1633875. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.