Digital Payment Adaptability and User Perception: A Comparative Study of
India and the United States

Vihaan Chawla

doi:10.46609/IJSSER.2026.v11i06.024

Title: Digital Payment Adaptability and User Perception: A Comparative Study of India and the United States
Authors: Vihaan Chawla
Journal: International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research (IJSSER) ISSN: 2455-8834 Volume: 11 Issue: 6 Publication Date: June 2026 DOI: 10.46609/IJSSER.2026.v11i06.024
\|\| \|\|
Vihaan Chawla The Shri Ram School Aravali
MLA 8 Chawla, Vihaan. "Digital Payment Adaptability and User Perception: A Comparative Study of India and the United States." Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research, vol. 11, no. 6, June 2026, pp. 2798-2818, doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2026.v11i06.024. Accessed June 2026. APA 6 Chawla, V. (2026, June). Digital Payment Adaptability and User Perception: A Comparative Study of India and the United States. Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research, 11(6), 2798-2818. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2026.v11i06.024 Chicago Chawla, Vihaan. "Digital Payment Adaptability and User Perception: A Comparative Study of India and the United States." Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research 11, no. 6 (June 2026), 2798-2818. Accessed June, 2026. https://doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2026.v11i06.024.
References [1] . ACI Worldwide. (2024). Prime time for real-time: Global payments report 2024. ACI Worldwide in partnership with GlobalData. https://www.aciworldwide.com/real-time-payments-report [2] . Diary of Consumer Payment Choice, Federal Reserve Financial Services. (2025). https://www.frbservices.org/news/research/2025-findings-from-the-diary-of-consumer-payment-choice [3] . 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 [4] . eMarketer. (2024). Digital wallet usage and mobile payment adoption: Global benchmarks 2024. Insider Intelligence / eMarketer. [5] . IANS. (2025, June 2). UPI transactions climb 18.68 billion transactions compared to 14.03 billion last year, says NPCI. Free Press Journal. https://www.freepressjournal.in/amp/business/upi-transactions-climb-1868-billion-transactions-compared-to-1403-billion-last-year-says-npci [6] . International Monetary Fund. (2025). Global financial stability report: Digital money and the future of financial infrastructure. IMF. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/GFSR [7] . Kiran, K. P., & Vedala, N. S. (2025). Assessing Unified Payments Interface (UPI) adoption and usage through the interplay of UTAUT factors. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05313-w [8] . National Payments Corporation of India. (2025). UPI product statistics. NPCI. https://www.npci.org.in/what-we-do/upi/product-statistics [9] . Reserve Bank of India. (2025). Annual report 2024–25. Reserve Bank of India. https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/AnnualReportPublications.aspx [10] . Sahu, G. P., Thakur, R., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2020). Understanding consumer adoption of mobile payment in India: Extending Meta-UTAUT model with personal innovativeness, anxiety, trust, and grievance redressal. International Journal of Information Management, 54, Article 102164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102164 [11] . Thakur, R., & Srivastava, M. (2014). Adoption readiness, personal innovativeness, perceived risk and usage intention across customer groups for mobile payment services in India. Internet Research, 24(3), 369–392. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2012-0244 [12] . UPI completes 10 glorious years, Emerges as World’s Largest Real-Time Payments Platform, Anchoring India’s Digital Economy. (n.d.). https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2257087®=3&lang=1 [13] . 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
ABSTRACT: This paper explores various aspects of digital payment adaptability in India and the US based on a comparative analysis between the digital payment infrastructure and perception of users in India and the United States. A structured survey instrument consisting of 16 questions covering the usage behaviour, demographic background and the attitudinal dimensions examined if there are statistically significant differences between the two groups with respect to six key perceptual constructs: ease of use, trust, safety perception, regulatory confidence, cashback motivation and overall satisfaction. The Mann-Whitney U test, Shapiro-Wilk normality test, Fisher's Exact Test, Cronbach's Alpha, and Spearman rank correlation tests were used to analyse the data. All these variables were found to be uniform, and no statistically significant differences were found across the six likert scale questions (all p > 0.05). There was a relatively higher level of reward based incentive driven platform selection for cashback influence, with a small proportion of US users indicating a more extreme feeling of reward from choosing a platform over Indian users. . Secondary data on incentives indicate that this is the approach being followed in India to build up adaptability similar to the US. Both Indian and US users reported high ease of use and satisfaction with their respective platforms. The results suggest that despite operating in markedly different sociological and regulatory contexts, these digital payment ecosystems have achieved uniformity in adoption in world’s largest economies which can be attributed to uniformisation of payment experience due to structural separation of payment industry from Banking.

IJSSER is Member of