EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 328 (2021) E3S Web Conf., 328 (2021) 04002 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 328, 2021
International Conference on Science and Technology (ICST 2021)
Article Number 04002
Number of page(s) 5
Section Information System, Big Data, Design Application, IOT
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202132804002
Published online 06 December 2021
  1. A. Iradianty and B. R. Aditya, “Indonesian Student Perception in Digital Payment,” J. Manaj. Bisnis, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 518–530, 2020, doi: 10.38043/jmb.v17i4.2713. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. P. Hanafizadeh and S. Marjaie, “Exploring banking business model types: A cognitive view,” Digit. Bus., vol. 1, no. 2, p. 100012, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.digbus.2021.100012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. S. Turki, “The Role of Marketing Information System on Decision Making: An Applied study on Royal Jordanian Air Lines (RJA).,” Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 175–185, 2011, [Online]. Available: www.ijbssnet.com. [Google Scholar]
  4. D. Lopes-Teixeira, F. Batista, and R. Ribeiro, “Spatio-temporal analysis of brand interest using social networks,” Iber. Conf. Inf. Syst. Technol. Cist., vol. 2018-June, pp. 1–6, 2018, doi: 10.23919/CISTI.2018.8399241. [Google Scholar]
  5. W. Widiyanti, V. Islami, R. -, S. -, and R. -, “OVO E-Wallet as a Platform of Digital Payment in Indonesia: An Empirical Analysis,” Monet. -J. Akunt. dan Keuang., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 237–241, 2020, doi: 10.31294/moneter.v7i2.9542. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. R. M. Acelian, “Analysis of Sales Promotion , Perceived Ease of Use and Security on Consumer Decisions to Use DANA Digital Wallet,” Int. J. Innov. Sci. Res. Technol., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1436– 1441, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://ijisrt.com/assets/upload/files/IJISRT21JAN622.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  7. D. S. Soegoto and M. P. Tampubolon, “E-Wallet as a Payment Instrument in the Millennial Era,” IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., vol. 879, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/879/1/012139. [Google Scholar]
  8. P. Hanafizadeh and S. Kim, “Digital Business: A new forum for discussion and debate on digital business model and digital transformation,” Digit. Bus., vol. 1, no. 1, p. 100006, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.digbus.2021.100006. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. S. Isrososiawan, R. Hurriyati, and P. D. Dirgantari, “User Mobile Payment Behavior Using Technology Acceptance Model (TAM): Study of ‘Dana’ E-Wallet Users,” J. Minds Manaj. Ide dan Inspirasi, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 181, 2019, doi: 10.24252/minds.v6i2.11274. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. K. Subaramaniam, R. Kolandaisamy, A. Bin Jalil, and I. Kolandaisamy, “The impact of E-Wallets for current generation,” J. Adv. Res. Dyn. Control Syst., vol. 12, no. 1 Special Issue, pp. 751–759, 2020, doi: 10.5373/JARDCS/V12SP1/20201126. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. J. Herdioko, P. B. Titalessy, and B. E. Krisanta, “Motivation of the Use of Digital Wallets in Young Generations in the Time of the Covid-19 Pandemic,” Arch. Bus. Res., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 116–127, 2021, doi: 10.14738/abr.91.9595. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. P. Vilar, “Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction (5th edition),” JASIST, vol. 61, pp. 1073–1074, 2010, doi: 10.1002/asi.21215. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. T. Raihan and I. S. Indira Rachmawati, “Analyzing Factors Influencing Continuance Intention of E-Wallet Adoption Using Utaut 2 Model (a Case Study of Dana in Indonesia),” e-Proceeding Manag., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 3717–3717, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  14. D. A. Fatah, “Evaluasi Usability dan Perbaikan Desain Aplikasi Mobile Menggunakan Usability Testing dengan Pendekatan Human-Centered Design (HCD),” Rekayasa, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 130–143, 2020, doi: 10.21107/rekayasa.v13i2.6584. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. H. B. Santoso, M. Schrepp, R. Yugo Kartono Isal, A. Y. Utomo, and B. Priyogi, “Measuring user experience of the student-centered E-learning environment,” J. Educ. Online, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–79, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  16. T. Forte, Jonas, Darin, “User Experience Evaluation for User Interface Redesign: A Case Study on a Bike Sharing Application,” Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. (including Subser. Lect. Notes Artif. Intell. Lect. Notes Bioinformatics), vol. 10290 LNCS, pp. 347–356, 2017, doi: 10.1007/978-3319-58640-3_44. [Google Scholar]
  17. A. Bangor, T. Staff, P. Kortum, J. Miller, and T. Staff, “Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale,” Determ. what Individ. SUS scores mean adding an adjective Rat. scale, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 114–123, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  18. P. C. C. M. J. S. E. N. Shneiderman B. and N. Diakopoulos, “Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 6th Edition,” JASIST, vol. 61, pp. 1073–1074, 2016, doi: 10.1002/asi.21215. [Google Scholar]
  19. I. S. Junus, H. B. Santoso, R. Y. K. Isal, and A. Y. Utomo, “Usability evaluation of the student centered e-Learning environment,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 62–82, 2015, doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v16i4.2175. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. D. Pertiwi, W. Suprapto, and E. Pratama, “Perceived Usage of E-Wallet among the Y Generation in Surabaya based on Technology Acceptance Model,” J. Tek. Ind., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 17–24, 2020, doi: 10.9744/jti.22.1.17-24. [Google Scholar]
  21. A. S. Kustono, A. Y. A. Nanggala, and I. Mas’ud, “Determinants of the Use of E-Wallet for Transaction Payment among College Students,” J. Econ. Business, Account. Ventur., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 85–95, 2020, doi: 10.14414/jebav.v23i1.2245. [Google Scholar]
  22. G. S. Akbar, E. R. Kaburuan, and V. Effendy, “User interface (UI) design of scheduling activity apps for autistic children,” Proc. 2017 Int. Conf. Orange Technol. ICOT 2017, vol. 2018-Janua, pp. 129–133, 2018, doi: 10.1109/ICOT.2017.8336105. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.