Impact of Digital Trust and Perceived Security on Online Banking Usage Behavior in Vietnam: Mediating Role of Perceived Risk and Moderating Role of Digital Financial Literacy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59653/jbmed.v4i02.2327Keywords:
Trust, perceived organization support, Risk Management, Digital skills, Online Customer Rating, PLS-SEM, VietnamAbstract
This study investigates the impact of digital trust (DT) and perceived security (PS) on online banking usage behavior in Vietnam, incorporating perceived risk (PR) as a mediator and digital financial literacy (DFL) as a moderator. Drawing on an extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) integrated with Commitment–Trust Theory, Perceived Risk Theory, and Protection Motivation Theory, a research model with eight hypotheses was developed and empirically tested. Data were collected from 385 online banking users in Ho Chi Minh City and surrounding provinces via a structured questionnaire. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using SmartPLS 4 was employed for data analysis. The measurement model demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity, with all constructs exceeding established thresholds for Cronbach’s alpha (≥ 0.70), composite reliability (≥ 0.70), and average variance extracted (≥ 0.50). The structural model results revealed that both DT (β = 0.278, p < 0.001) and PS (β = 0.231, p < 0.001) significantly and positively influenced intention to use (IU), while both constructs significantly reduced PR. PR exhibited a significant negative effect on IU (β = −0.189, p < 0.001), and mediation analysis confirmed that PR partially mediated both the DT–IU and PS–IU relationships. Furthermore, DFL significantly moderated the PR–IU link (β = 0.118, p = 0.013), weakening the negative effect of PR on IU for users with higher DFL. IU strongly predicted actual usage behavior (β = 0.637, p < 0.001). The model explained 51.8% of the variance in IU and 40.6% in actual behavior. These findings contribute to the digital banking literature by providing an integrated trust–security–risk framework with conditional boundary effects, and offer practical implications for Vietnamese commercial banks seeking to enhance digital service adoption through trust-building strategies and financial literacy programs.
Downloads
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Al-Doghan, M. A., & Mirzaliev, S. (2024). Cybersecurity awareness and digital banking adoption: Exploring the moderating impact of digital literacy. International Journal of Economics and Financial Studies, 16(3), 34–58. https://doi.org/10.34109/ijefs.202416303
Almaiah, M. A., Al-Otaibi, S., Shishakly, R., Hassan, L., Lutfi, A., Alrawad, M., Qatawneh, M., & Alghanam, O. A. (2023). Investigating the role of perceived risk, perceived security and perceived trust on smart m-banking application using SEM. Sustainability, 15(13), 9908. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15139908
Alrawad, M., Lutfi, A., Alyatama, S., Al Khattab, A., Alsoboa, S. S., Almaiah, M. A., ... & Ahmed, N. A. (2023). Examining the influence of trust and perceived risk on customers’ intention to use NFC mobile payment system. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 9(3), 100114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.100114
Amnas, M. B., Selvam, M., & Parayitam, S. (2024). FinTech and financial inclusion: Exploring the mediating role of digital financial literacy and the moderating influence of perceived regulatory support. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 17(3), 108. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17030108
Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. In R. S. Hancock (Ed.), Proceedings of the 43rd National Conference of the American Marketing Association (pp. 389–398). American Marketing Association.
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
Chellappa, R. K., & Pavlou, P. A. (2002). Perceived information security, financial liability and consumer trust in electronic commerce transactions. Logistics Information Management, 15(5/6), 358–368. https://doi.org/10.1108/09576050210447046
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Featherman, M. S., & Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 451–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00111-3
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage.
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
Henseler, J., & Chin, W. W. (2010). A comparison of approaches for the analysis of interaction effects between latent variables using partial least squares path modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 17(1), 82–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903439003
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382
InCorp Asia. (2025). Digital banking in Vietnam: Mobile banking transformation. Retrieved from https://vietnam.incorp.asia/digital-banking-in-vietnam/
International Monetary Fund. (2024). Global Financial Stability Report: The last mile: Financial vulnerabilities and risks. IMF.
Jafri, J. A., Amin, S. I. M., Rahman, A. M. A., & Nor, S. M. (2024). A systematic literature review of the role of trust and security on Fintech adoption in banking. Heliyon, 10(1), e22–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22035
Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decision Support Systems, 44(2), 544–564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2007.07.001
Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2014). The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Literature, 52(1), 5–44. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.52.1.5
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299405800302
Nguyen, G. D., & Dao, T. H. T. (2024). Factors influencing continuance intention to use mobile banking: An extended expectation-confirmation model with moderating role of trust. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02734-1
Nguyen, H. T. M., Le, T. A., & Nguyen, T. H. (2023). The role of perceived security and social influence on the adoption of digital banking in Vietnam. Journal of Marketing and Consumer Research, 7(2), 136–153.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2022). SmartPLS 4. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS. Retrieved from https://www.smartpls.com
Rogers, R. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 91(1), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803
Sarkar, S., Chauhan, S., & Khare, A. (2025). Between firewalls and feelings: Modelling trust and commitment in digital banking platforms. Journal of Cybersecurity and Privacy, 5(4), 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcp5040089
State Bank of Vietnam. (2024). Payment system development report 2024. SBV.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
WJARR. (2025). Trust in digital banking: A thematic review of drivers, barriers. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 26(2), 4141–4147.
World Bank. (2025). Global Findex Database 2025. World Bank Group.
Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1086/651257
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Trinh Thi Bich Ngoc
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
