IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Payment Instruments as Perceived by Consumers - a Public Survey

  • Nicole Jonker

Survey results show that Dutch consumers perceive paying in cash as an inexpensive way to pay, while they regard electronic payment cards as relatively expensive. This finding partly explains the low usage of electronic payment cards in point-of-sale (POS) payments. The survey also highlights several non-price features that contribute to the unpopularity of electronic payment cards. The objective of the survey was to identify price and non-price features of payment instruments that can be used to stimulate the use of electronic payment cards. Their attractiveness can be increased, through 1) technological modifications to e-purses and debit cards that enhance their convenience, 2) by increasing the number of acceptance points and 3) by drawing public attention to the speed of e-purse payments. Making it more expensive for consumers to pay in cash could also increase the usage of electronic payment instruments.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department in its series DNB Working Papers with number 053.

in new window

Date of creation: Sep 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:dnb:dnbwpp:053
Contact details of provider: Postal: Postbus 98, 1000 AB Amsterdam
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. David B. Humphrey & Lawrence B. Pulley & Jukka M. Vesala, 1996. "Cash, paper, and electronic payments: a cross-country analysis," Proceedings, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.), pages 914-941.
  2. Orazio Attanasio & Luigi Guiso & Tullio Jappelli, 1998. "The Demand for Money, Financial Innovation, and the Welfare Cost of Inflation: An Analysis with Households' Data," CSEF Working Papers 03, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
  3. Dotsey, Michael, 1988. "The Demand for Currency in the United States," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 20(1), pages 22-40, February.
  4. Hyytinen, Ari & Takalo , Tuomas, 2004. "Multihoming in the market for payment media: evidence from young Finnish consumers," Research Discussion Papers 25/2004, Bank of Finland.
  5. David Humphrey & Moshe Kim & Bent Vale, 1998. "Realizing the gains from electronic payments: costs, pricing, and payment choice," Proceedings 586, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  6. John V. Duca & William C. Whitesell, 1991. "Credit cards and money demand: a cross-sectional study," Research Paper 9112, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
  7. repec:kap:decono:v:154:y:2006:i:3:p:345-372 is not listed on IDEAS
  8. Fischer, Björn & Köhler, Petra & Seitz, Franz, 2004. "The demand for euro area currencies: past, present and future," Working Paper Series 0330, European Central Bank.
  9. Humphrey, David B & Pulley, Lawrence B & Vesala, Jukka M, 1996. "Cash, Paper, and Electronic Payments: A Cross-Country Analysis," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 28(4), pages 914-39, November.
  10. Hans Brits & Carlo Winder, 2005. "Payments are no free lunch," DNB Occasional Studies 302, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
  11. W. Bolt, 2003. "Retail Payments in the Netherlands: some Facts and Some Theory," WO Research Memoranda (discontinued) 722, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dnb:dnbwpp:053. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Rob Vet)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.