Purchase Intention of E-Payment: The Substitute or Complementary
Role of Brand, Sales Promotions, and Information Quality
Mutiara Lingga Ramadanty and Dwi Kartikasari
1
Department of Business Administration, Politeknik Negeri Batam, Ahmad Yani Street, Batam, Indonesia
Keywords: e-payment, e-wallet, Purchase Intention, Brand Equity, Sales Promotion, Information Quality
Abstract: e-payment is becoming more relevant in the era of the revolution industry 4.0 despite the corona health
crisis. This study aims to determine the impact of brand equity, information quality, sales promotions, and
the interaction effect between the three aforementioned antecedents to purchase intention of e-payment. The
research used structural equation modeling, hierarchical moderated regression, and simple slope analysis to
a sample of 241 respondents selected using proportionate sampling. Constructs were adapted from past
studies, but only constructs passed the validity, reliability, and model fitness were subsequently used. This
research affirms previous studies proving that information quality, brand equity, and sales promotions are
positively associated with purchase intention. This study contributes to the literature when it finds the
simultaneous significant positive effect of these three factors to purchase intention given the fact that past
studies only tested separate effects. The study also confirms preceding discoveries that acquire a stronger
effect once the interaction effect of overall determinants is considered. Yet, the interaction effect separately
tends to substitute rather than a complementary role, although not significant. Therefore, theoretically, this
study does not corroborate the new concepts of the isolated interaction effects. This study suggests new
predictors and the various context in subsequent studies for the benefits of theories and practices.
1 INTRODUCTION
Like in other countries across the world, the
financial technology abbreviated fintech, is
expanding rapidly in Indonesia (Davis et al., 2017).
Fintech utilizes innovation in financial services.
Fintech very first model was Zopa which was
introduced in 2004 in the UK (Ferdiana & Darma,
2019). In Indonesia, the growth of fintech is
extraordinary – fifty fintech companies in 2016
tripled to 167 ventures in just two years and
transaction value grows 16,3 percent annually
(Fintech Singapore, 2018). The growth of Fintech
was high before the COVID-19 outbreak, further, it
benefits expansion greater than ever due to the
massive use of e-commerce after the social
restriction following the plague. Henceforth, fintech
is becoming more relevant in the era of revolution
industry 4.0 despite the corona health crisis.
There is no standard classification of fintech. In
Indonesia, resembling in the U.S., e-payment, and e-
lending dominate the market with mobile payment
as the market leader as shown in Figure 1.
concerning who is in charge of fintech, payment
activities are regulated by the Central Bank of
Indonesia while lending ones, as well as
crowdfunding are by the Indonesian Financial
Services Authority (OJK).
Figure 1: Distribution of the Indonesian Fintech.
(Franedya & Bosnia, 2018)
As the blockbuster in the fintech ecosystem, e-
wallet offers settlement and clearing payment
services in cashless, quick, secured, and accurate
manners for all types of transactions. Various e-
payment providers compete for the position of a
298
Ramadanty, M. and Kartikasari, D.
Purchase Intention of e-Payment: The Substitute or Complementary Role of Brand, Sales Promotions, and Information Quality.
DOI: 10.5220/0010355402980308
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Applied Economics and Social Science (ICAESS 2020) - Shaping a Better Future Through Sustainable Technology, pages 298-308
ISBN: 978-989-758-517-3
Copyright
c
 2021 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

bestseller. This position seems to be won by PT.
Dompet Anak Bangsa issued Gopay as indicated by
Figure 2. Gopay has been maintaining its place
consistently since 2017 based on the number of
monthly active users at Google Play and iOS.
Figure 2: The top three e-wallet providers in Indonesia.
(Devita, 2019)
Gopay has become the most popular online
payment application in the Indonesian community,
especially among millennials. It contributes to 30
percent of total electronic transactions nation-wide
(Devita, 2019). Gopay is used to pay diverse
transactions to a wide range of partners such as
McDonald's and enormous micro, small and
medium enterprises, as well as pay electricity bill
and buy vouchers. It targets generation Y like
university students who are attached very heavily
with mobile phones and the internet in their daily
activities. Considering its dominant impact in the
e-payment sector in Indonesia, the authors choose
Gopay as the scope of this study where the type of
extended offers is specified accordingly. Students
are also chosen as the samples because they tend
connection to Gojek.
Many factors lead to consumer interest in
using or buying technology-products online. From
the buyer’s perspective, there are internal factors
such as the perceived ease, perceived benefits, and
perceived ease of use for technology-related
products according to the technology acceptance
model (Hasim et al., 2019). Whereas from the
product’s perspective, there are external factors,
namely brand, information richness, and extended
offers (Yen, 2014).
Most literature builds upon internal factors as
the antecedents of online purchase intention while
external factors are less discussed (Putri & Noer,
2017). Thus, this work seeks to shed more light on
the role of brand, extended offers, and information
richness on online purchase intention. This work
pursues to fill in the research gap in the adoption of
e-payment. Besides, this study has a vital role to
improve the adoption of a cashless society in
Indonesia. Its implications are beneficial for both
regulators and application providers as they seek to
supervise and manage the expanding e-commerce
environment.
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Determinants of Purchase Intention
Consumer purchase intentions reveal an interest that
triggers and encourages consumers to buy a
particular product (Agusli & Kunto, 2013). It
comprises a process shrouded in the consumer mind
when looking at a product until she decides to buy
the product at once or at a later time (Tariq, Nawaz,
Nawaz, & Butt, 2013).
Customer purchase intention is not a new
concept in sales and marketing literature. It
represents consumer behavior that invites sales
volume (Santini et al., 2016). Sales are always the
bottom line of any business. However, when
purchase intention’s literature is confined in the e-
commerce context and digital environment,
especially e-payment in Indonesia, the studies
dismount in this scope. Further, when purchase
intention is limited under quantitative studies, the
works are scant in this regard. The authors
summarize the related studies as follows:
Purchase Intention of e-Payment: The Substitute or Complementary Role of Brand, Sales Promotions, and Information Quality
299

Table 1: Summary of literature findings on aspects
affecting electronic purchase intention.
Independent
va
r
ia
b
les
Context Studies Findings
Brand Merchant
characteristics
Two studies
(Akar &
Nasir, 2015)
Significant
positive impact
Brand quality
and brand
equity of
branded
we
b
site
Chang et al.
(2017)
Significant
positive impact
Retailer brand
in e-
commerce
Putri & Noer
(2017); Yen
(2014)
Significant
positive
impact, but
contradictory
in substitute
and
complement
effect
Information
quality
Merchant
characteristics
Two studies
(Akar &
Nasir, 2015)
Significant
positive impact
Information
richness in v-
commerce for
se
r
v
ices
Chesney et al.
(2017)
Significant
positive impact
Information
quality and
media
Richness
(information
supplied by
seller)
Chen & Chang
(2018)
Significant
positive
precursors
with
satisfaction as
an intervening
va
r
ia
b
le
Information
richness
Putri & Noer
(2017); Yen
(2014)
Significant
positive
impact, but
ambiguous in
substitute and
complement
effect
Sales
promotions
Relative
advantages
Twelve
studies (Akar
& Nasir,
2015)
Significant
positive impact
Sales
promotions
Santini et al.
(2016)
Significant
positive impac
t
Extended
offers
Putri & Noer
(2017); Yen
(2014)
Significant
positive
impact, but
inconsistent in
substitute and
complement
effect
2.2 Information Quality Impact on
Purchase Intention
Information quality reflects the amount of
information conveyed by the seller via the media of
communication to consumers. The detailed and
complete facts greatly facilitate consumers to get a
description and specification of the products to be
purchased. The availability and completeness of info
help improving consumer buying interest.
The theory of information richness postulates
that electronic media like e-payment can promote e-
commerce, but to a lesser extent than information
richer face-to-face interactions in proportion to its
capacity to carry information (Chesney et al., 2017).
The richer the information, the higher the level of
trust, as a result, the greater intention of customers
to buy electronic products or services. When taking
satisfaction into account, the higher the quality of
information supplied by the seller, the more satisfied
the customer, henceforth, the bigger her interest to
procure (Chen & Chang, 2018). Eventually, this
work brings forth the following hypothesis:
H1: Information quality positively impact the
purchase intention of e-payment
2.3 Brand Equity Impact on Purchase
Intention
A brand is the reputation of the seller that can affect
consumer interest in using its products or services.
Every product sold in the market has a reputation in
the eyes of every consumer. A brand is something
that has been deliberately created by the suppliers to
differentiate their products with the products of their
competitors (Arifin & Fachrodji, 2015)
The theory of planned behavior (TPB) as well as the
theory of reasoned actions (TRA) claims that one’s
perceptions affect her intentions and behaviors
(Mady, 2017). This theory is adopted to explain the
link between consumers’ purchase intention and
specific brand or products (Chin et al., 2019). The
perceived brand equity and brand quality lead to
trust that entices purchase intention. In other words,
A brand is stimulus, while purchase intention is the
response to the a stimulus (Chang et al., 2017).
Thus, this study defines the following hypothesis:
H2: Brand equity positively impact the purchase
intention of e-payment
2.4 Sales Promotions Impact on
Purchase Intention
Sales promotions include additional services from
sellers such as discounts, cashback, online services,
express delivery, and other things that can increase
the interest of consumers to use products or services
from these providers. Extra promotional actions
such as discounted sale are a service that is often
ICAESS 2020 - The International Conference on Applied Economics and Social Science
300

used by a company to attract customers to continue
to buy or use its products.
The theory of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is
highly linked with marketing activities (Hasim et al.,
2019), including sales promotions. Promotional
events are aimed to motivate a person to decide
between buying products by appealing to her needs
such as basic needs, security, love, self-esteem, and
self-actualization. Researchers declare that sales
promotions are vital for marketing strategy because
they invite customers to a transaction, thus
mitigating the psychological costs related to
purchasing (Santini et al., 2016). Therefore, this
work offers the following hypothesis:
H3: Sales promotions positively impact the purchase
intention of e-payment
2.5 The Interaction Impact of the
Brand, Information Quality, and
Sales Promotions on Purchase
Intention: Substitute or
Complement
Substitute and complementary roles are frequently
discussed in e-commerce settings. Substitute
products are interchangeable while complimentary
ones are those that might be purchased together by
users (Wang, Jiang, Ren, Tang, & Yin, 2018). Many
products in the current digital world are claimed as
substitute but research proves otherwise. For
instance, Facebook is accused to deteriorate
relationship and decrease intimacy among its users
because it substitutes for face-to-face interaction.
This claim is rejected when research finds that
Facebook acts as an extension or complementary of
face-to-face interaction (Kujath, 2011). Another
example is Uber. Its effect on public transit is
ambiguous. Uber is an alternative mode of travel,
thus one might claim it is a substitute service.
However, it can also increase the reach and
flexibility of public transit. Research shows that
Uber is not a substitute, but rather, a complement
for the average transit agency because it increases
public transit use for the average transit agency in
U.S metropolitan areas (Hall, Palsson, & Price,
2018).
Previous research has shown unclear findings of
the interaction effect between information quality,
brand, and sales promotions. Table 2 recapitulates
the results.
Table 2: Summary of literature findings on the interaction
effect of a brand, information quality, and sales
promotions on purchase intention.
Va
r
ia
b
les Interaction Stu
d
ies Fin
d
in
g
s
Information
quality and
brand equity
Complement Yen (2014) Statistically
significant
Substitute Putri &
Noer
(2017)
Not
significant
Information
quality and
sales
promotions
Complement Yen (2014) Statistically
significant
Complement Putri &
Noer
(2017)
Not
significant
Brand
equity and
sales
promotions
Substitute Yen (2014) Statistically
significant
Substitute Putri &
Noer
(2017)
Not
significant
Table 2 indicates the contradictory results of two
previous studies. This work attempts to resolve this
issue by adding more findings to support or reject
either one. Because Yen (2014) has more significant
findings, the authors propose the following
hypotheses:
H4: Information quality moderates the brand equity
in complementary impact on the increase of
purchase intention of e-payment in such a way that
e-payment provider with high information quality
will expand the effect on purchase intentions when
brand equity is well- known.
H5: Information quality moderates the sales
promotions in complementary impact on the
increase of purchase intention of e-payment in such
a way that e-payment providers with high
information quality will magnify the effect on
purchase intentions when sales promotions are high-
pitched.
H6: Brand equity moderates the sales promotions in
substitute impact on the increase of purchase
intention of e-payment in such a way that e-
payment providers with a renowned brand will
inflate the effect on purchase intentions even when
sales promotions are low.
H7: Information quality, brand equity, and sales
promotions altogether positively impact the
purchase intention of e-payment H4, H5, and H6
are hypotheses induced from the tendencies of
previous studies. While H7 is a new hypothesis to
integrate all variables simultaneously.
Purchase Intention of e-Payment: The Substitute or Complementary Role of Brand, Sales Promotions, and Information Quality
301

2.6 Research Model
The seven afore-mentioned hypotheses are
depicted in the research model below.
Figure 3: Research model of the role of brand, information
quality, and sales promotions on purchase intentions of e-
payment
H1, H2, and H3 were tested using Structural
Equation Model (SEM) analysis with AMOS as the
statistical tool. H4, H5, H6, and H7 were analyzed
using hierarchical moderated multiple regression
and simple slope with SPSS software.
3 RESEARCH METHOD
3.1 Research Design
This study uses quantitative research methods. The
authors adopt the instrument of past research as
follows. The study did not run a pilot test for the
questionnaire because it used parameters that were
used by other researchers.
Table 3: The operationalization of constructs (The
instrument of this study)
Construct Item Source
Information
quality
(IQ = X1)
IQ1. The e-payment
provider enables me to
obtain rich information
Yen (2014)
IQ2. The e-payment
provider supplies diverse
types of information from
electronic mass media
IQ3. The e-payment
provider equips me to get
relevant information about
its services
Putri & Noer
(2017)
IQ4. The e-payment
provider equips me to get
consistent information about
its services
Construct Item Source
Brand equity
(BE = X2)
BE1. E-payment provider is
well-known brand
Putri & Noer
(2017)
BE2. E-payment provider
has a good reputation
BE3. I recognize the e-
payment logo
Yen
(2014)
BE4. I have better opinions
about the e-payment
provide
r
Sales
promotions (SP
= X3)
SP1. The e-payment
provider offers like cashback
and promotions
Putri
& Noer (2017)
SP2. The e-payment
provider extend the offers
with its merchants
SP3. The payment and refill
processes are convenien
t
SP4. The e-payment
provider supports peripheral
services
Purchase
intention (PI =
Y)
PI1. I would like to buy
products using e-paymen
t
Putri
& Noer (2017)
PI2. I will use e-payment in
the future
PI3. I intend to buy a
product using e-paymen
t
PI4. I will buy a product
using e-paymen
t
Data were collected by questionnaire with 5-scale
Likert using Google form from January to March
2020. The respondents agreed by checking the
consent statement instead of signing it in person.
3.2 Sampling
As Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is used in
this study, the author’s determined sample size as 15
times the number of indicators (Hair & Anderson,
1998) in (Riduwan & Akdon, 2006). This research
has 16 items as described in Table 3. Accordingly,
the required minimum sample is 16 x 15 = 240
respondents. The sampling technique used in this
research was accidental proportionate sampling as
samples taken from heterogeneous student
populations (Riduwan & Akdon, 2006). Students
were picked for their savviness on the internet and e-
commerce. Furthermore, the number of students
targeted was calculated in proportion of 16 study
programs by the following formula:
ICAESS 2020 - The International Conference on Applied Economics and Social Science
302

𝑛𝑖 
𝑁𝑖
𝑁
. 𝑛
Where:
ni: the number of samples proportionately
n: the number of the total targeted samples
Ni: total population proportionately by the study
program
N: the total population of internet-savvy students
The research managed to collect response per study
program as follows:
Table 4: Samples
N
o Stud
y
p
ro
g
ram Sam
p
le
1 Business administration 27
2 Mana
g
erial accountin
g
22
3 Accountin
g
21
4 Electrical engineering 15
5 Electro manufacture en
g
ineerin
g
9
6 Mechatronics 18
7 Robotics 7
8 Instrumentation 7
9 Power
p
lant 4
10 Informatics 27
11 Multimedia and networkin
g
29
12 Geomatika 12
13 Animation 6
14 Mechanical en
g
ineerin
g
20
15 Shi
p
b
uildin
g
en
g
ineerin
g
9
16 Aircraft maintenance 8
Total 241
Samples aged from 18 to 23 years old. The majority is
20 and 21 years old.
Table 5: Validity and normality results
Indica
tor
Validity Normality
α
(≥r
table
)
St. Loading
(≥0.6)
Skew
(±2.58)
Kurtosis
(±2.58)
IQ1* 0.585 0.310
IQ2 0.834 0.845 -5.792 1.135
IQ3 0.767 0.804 -6.740 3.489
IQ4* 0.712 0.540
BE1 0.846 0.850 -7.879 5.154
BE2 0.861 0.909 -8.004 5.122
BE3* 0.536 0.260
BE4 0.875 0.913 -7.031 2.978
SP1 0.782 0.799 -6.248 1.813
SP2 0.747 0.770 -5.823 1.513
SP3 0.769 0.830 -6.037 1.542
SP4* 0.705 0.520
PI1 0.877 0.873 -6.476 1.874
PI2 0.842 0.877 -7.012 2.619
PI3 0.876 0.887 -7.425 3.052
PI4 0.884 0.859 -6.416 2.215
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 Validity, Reliability, and Normality
This study used regression analysis utilizing SPSS as
well as SEM utilizing AMOS. The validity of
Cronbach’s alpha (α) resulting from SPSS shows
that all Cronbach’s alphas are well above its cut-off
value of 0.1264 drawn from r- table (See Table 5).
Thus, all parameters are valid according to
Cronbach’s alpha. However, when the validity is
looked closely with regards to standard loading (st.
loading) or factor loading or lambda , Table 5
shows that some items are below the threshold value
of 0.6 (Putri & Noer, 2017), hence some indicators
are eliminated (marked with an asterisk). After the
elimination of indicators, the authors rerun the
AMOS resulting in the standard loading values in
the table below. Further analysis is based on the
selected parameters only, those that fulfill the cut-
off criteria.
* eliminated indicators SEM programs assume that
endogenous variables are normally distributed.
However, as can be seen in Table 5, none of the
critical ratios of skew falls between -2.58 to 2.58,
thus data are skewed. Some indicators, i.e. IQ2,
SP1, SP2, SP3, and PI fulfill the criteria because
their critical ratios of kurtosis are from -2.58 to
2.58, thus data are partially kurtotic. Table 7
demonstrates that multivariate value is within the
threshold standards. We conclude that the residuals
of this SEM analysis are not univariate normally
distribution but joint multivariate normal (JMVN)
thus the normal distribution assumption is not
completely met. The authors expect that the large
samples in this study make up this flaw and the
analysis can be carried out further.
This study used Cronbach’s alpha not only for
validity testing but also for the reliability or internal
consistency testing. Given the decisive factors as
displayed in Table 6, all reliability coefficients
satisfy the threshold requirements including
construct or composite reliability and the average
variance extracted (AVE) where convergent validity
is met. Therefore, this research has fulfilled all the
criteria of a construct’s validity and reliability.
Purchase Intention of e-Payment: The Substitute or Complementary Role of Brand, Sales Promotions, and Information Quality
303

Table 6: Construct’s validity and reliability results
Variable Validity
α
(≥0.7)
Reliability
Construct
(≥0.7)
AVE
(≥0.5)
Information Quality 0.784 0.810 0.680
Bran
d
Equit
y
0.700 0.920 0.794
Sales Promotions 0.732 0.842 0.640
Purchase Intention 0.893 0.928 0.764
4.2 Structural Equation Model Results
To validate the SEM model as a whole, the
authors evaluate goodness-of-fitness (GoF). The
research meets all requirements regarding the
model fit.
Table 7: Goodness-of-fitness of the model
Ite
m
ValueTh
r
eshol
d
Remar
k
Probability level
absolute fit
NFI 0.967 ≥0.8 Model fit
FCFI 0.993 ≥0.95, ≤1 Model fit
II 0.993 ≥0.8 Model fit
TLI 0.991 ≥0.95, ≤1 Model fit
CMIN/DF atau
relative X
2
1.235 ≤2 Model fit
RMSEA 0.041 ≤0.06 Model fit
Test statistics in Table 8 reveals the statistically
significant positive individual path coefficients.
Column estimates (est.) exhibits positive values
while column significance (Sig.) displays values
below the cut-off significance level of 0.05.
Therefore, H1, H2, and H3 are accepted, in other
words, information quality, brand equity, and sales
promotions partially influence consumer purchase
intention of e-payment in positive a fashion. The
higher the quality of information or the better known
the brand equity or the greater sales promotions, the
larger the intention of consumers to use e-payment.
Figure 4: The Framework results of H1, H2, H3 with SEM
model
Table 8: Results of hypotheses testing with SEM model
Va
r
ia
b
le Est. (+) Sig. Decision
PI <--- IQ 0.650 0.007** H1 accepted
PI <--- BE 0.367 0.037 H2 acce
p
te
d
PI <--- SP 0.358 0.007** H3 accepted
** Statistically significant at p≤0.01, R2 = 0.937
4.3 Hierarchical Moderated Multiple
Regression Results
To test the interaction between independent
variables and the dependent variable, this study
used hierarchical moderated multiple regression as
well as simple slope analysis utilizing SPSS. The
authors used the technique of least squares
hierarchically, i.e. step 1 is the main effects
(information quality, brand equity, and sales
promotions), followed by interaction in step 2. As
such, we adapted Yen Where Y is purchase
intention, X1 is information quality, X2 is brand
equity, X3 is sales promotions, α is intercepted,  is
slope coefficient, and  is an error. Table 9 displays
that model 2 with the interaction between
information quality, brand equity, and sales
promotions accounted for significantly more
variance than by themselves without interaction on
consumer’s purchase intention of e-payment. R-
square significantly improved from model 1 to
model 2.
ICAESS 2020 - The International Conference on Applied Economics and Social Science
304

Table 9: Results of hypotheses testing with hierarchical
moderated multiple regression model
Predicto
r
Coeff. Sig. Remarks
Model
Step 1
IQ 0.084 0.368
BE 0.522* 0.000
SP 0.388* 0.000
R
2
0.832
F 228* 0.000 Model 1
significant, H7
acce
p
te
d
Model
Ste
p
2
IQ 0.201 0.740
BE 0.772* 0.006
SP 0.959 0.139
IQ x BE 0.009 0.952 H4 rejecte
d
IQ x SP -0.051 0.461 H5 rejecte
d
BE x SP -0.111 0.422 H6 rejecte
d
R
2
0.846
R
2
F sig
0.013* 0.010 Model 2
significantly
accounts more
variance than
model 1
F 123* 0.000 Model 2a
significant
* Statistically significant at p≤0.05
Although model 2 improved R-square, its
interactions are not statistically significant as shown
by the significance level of IQ x BE, IQ x SP, and
BE x SP that exceed 0.05. Therefore, H4, H5, and
H6 are rejected. Whilst model 1 indicates
statistically significant F value so that H7 is
accepted.
4.4 Simple Slope Results
Simple slope analysis in this study is used to
support or reject the coefficients of H4, H5, and
H6. It was done by looking at the slope of two
lines drawn using the visualization data output
obtained from (2014) and used the subsequent
regression equation in two hierarchical steps:
Item Value Threshold Remark
Multivariate 0.862 Between
±2.58
Multivariate
normal
dist
r
i
b
u
tion
D
egrees of freedom 48 ≥0 The model is
structurally
identified,
model fit.
Chi-sq
u
are X
2 0.127 ≥0.05 Overall /
Figure 5: The substitute role of brand equity and
information quality to purchase intention of e-payment
Figure 6: The substitute role of sales promotions and
information quality to purchase intention of e-payment
Figure 7: The substitute role of brand equity and
information quality to purchase intention of e-payment
Purchase Intention of e-Payment: The Substitute or Complementary Role of Brand, Sales Promotions, and Information Quality
305

Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7 demonstrate two
lines converging to a point suggesting that the
interaction between information quality, brand
equity, and sales promotions tend to be substitution
than complement which reject H4 and H5 yet
support H6 in terms of interactions. Although
hierarchical moderated multiple regression results
prove that these interactions are not statistically
significant.
4.5 Discussions
This research affirms previous studies (Yen, 2014;
Putri & Noer, 2017) proving that information
quality, brand equity, and sales promotions are
positively associated with consumer purchase
intention. This finding is consistent in this regard
supported by not only its SEM results but also
hierarchical regression results. However, this study
extends the context from the previous e-commerce
environment to the context of this study that is e-
payment. Furthermore, this study enriches literature
in a way that it finds the simultaneous significant
positive effect of these three factors (H7) to
purchase intention especially given the fact that the
two reference studies did not test this hypothesis and
only tested separate effects.
Provided the consistency of this finding with
previous researches, this study implies the managers
of e-payment providers must pay great attention to
information quality, brand equity, and sales
promotions to stimulate purchase intention and
further sales. It is obvious than consumers prefer
buying from suppliers that provide rich, updated,
relevant, and consistent information about the
products and services than those lacking
information. The consumers also tend to accept
services from well-known brands rather than
infamous ones, hence practitioners should build
their good reputation and respectable opinions as
well as keep introducing their existence via their
logos among potential users. Last, the customers
inclined to shop from sellers who offer extended
sales promotions including cashback, discounts,
enormous merchants, convenient refill, and
peripheral services that add values to the primary
services of e-payment to the shoppers.
Besides, given the outcome of this study, it is
advisable that the authority that supervises the e-
payment environment encourage the providers to put
their best efforts in the aspects of information
quality, brand equity, and sales promotions to attract
a new customer base and socialize a cashless
society. In the time of the covid-19 plague where a
cashless transaction is preferable than otherwise to
limit the spread of the virus attached in paper money
and coins, e-payment should be promoted its
advantages, offers, and prestige for more massive
utilization in the community iconsistent and clearly.
The study also confirms preceding discoveries
that R- squared improves substantially as the
interaction effect of information quality, brand
equity, and sales promotions as a whole to purchase
intention was taken into account when compared
with R-squared without the interaction effect. This
study acquires a stronger effect than earlier studies
as it exhibits a higher coefficient of determination
where the model of this study explains 84.6 percent
of the variability of data. The R-squared increases
by 1.3 percent once the interaction effect of overall
determinants is considered. This uniformity of this
finding suggests that future research should
incorporate the interaction effect of variables in the
research model to result in a sounder impact, thus
reinforce the existing theories.
This study notices that the interaction effect of
information quality and brand equity (IQ x BE),
information quality and sales promotions (IQ x SP),
brand equity, and sales promotions (BE x SP)
separately to purchase intention tend to substitute
rather than a complementary role, despite its
insignificancy. The immateriality of each interaction
effect is consistent with Putri & Noer (2017) but
opposing Yen (2014). Therefore, theoretically, this
study does not corroborate the new concepts of the
isolated interaction effects that the previous study
addressed.
Although the individual interaction effects are
not substantial, the substitute effect as shown by
simple slope graphs means that information quality
moderates the brand equity on the increase of
purchase intention of e-payment in such a way that
e-payment provider with high information quality
will expand the effect on purchase intentions when
brand equity is not prominent. Thus, information
quality substitutes brand equity on purchase
intention. Accordingly, e-wallet sellers should
provide rich information and sales promotions
especially when their brands are not well-known, in
other words, rich information and sales promotions
substitute the role of brands on purchase intention.
Likewise, e-payment providers with high
information quality and eminent brand will magnify
the effect on purchase intentions when sales
promotions are low-pitched. Consequently,
practitioners should always keep in touch with their
consumers even when they cannot offer them extra
ICAESS 2020 - The International Conference on Applied Economics and Social Science
306

promotions with consistent and rich information
about their brands.
The disparities of outcome with the past study
of Yen (2014) might be caused by differences in the
culture of respondents that result in distinct
behavior. Brands and promotions vary in different
countries and cities. For example, Gopay brand
exists in Indonesia, but not in Taiwan. Promotions of
merchants exist in Jakarta, but not in Batam. Hence
this study calls for researches in various cultures,
diverse settings, and assorted countries in the future.
Another reason that triggers dissimilar findings is
that this study uses Gopay as the context of
explaining promotions, brands, and information
quality to our samples when they stumbled on our
questionnaire. Although Gopay is the most widely
used e-payment that the majority of samples can
relate to, it might contribute to the biasness of the
study to the point where the findings are limited to
be generalized and applied to other sectors.
Some control variables might affect purchase
intention yet disbanded in this study. For instance,
Yen (2014) claimed that age contributes to purchase
intention significantly yet Putri & Noer (2017) did
not support this. Both agree that gender is not a
significant antecedent. Yen (2014) argues that
experience might be a better predictor than age and
suggests to contain this predictor isubsequent studies
for the benefits of theories and practices.
5 CONCLUSIONS
This research affirms previous studies proving that
information quality, brand equity, and sales
promotions are positively associated with consumer
purchase intention. However, this study extends
the context from the previous e-commerce
environment to e-payment. Furthermore, this study
enriches literature in a way that finds the
simultaneous significant positive effect of these
three factors to purchase intention given the fact that
past studies only tested separate effects. Provided
the consistency of this finding, managers of e-
payment providers must pay great attention to
information quality, brand equity, and sales
promotions to stimulate purchase intention and
further sales. It is obvious than consumers tend to
buy from suppliers that provide rich, updated,
relevant, and consistent information about the
products and services. The consumers also tend to
accept services from well-known brands, hence
practitioners should build their good reputation as
well as keep introducing their existence via their
logos among potential users. Last, the customers
inclined to shop from sellers who offer extended
sales promotions including cashback, discounts,
enormous merchants, convenient refill, and
peripheral services that add values to the primary
services of e- payment to the shoppers. Also, it is
advisable that the authority that supervises the e-
payment environment to encourage the providers
to put their best efforts in the three aspects as to
attract a new customer base and socialize cashless
society, more importantly in the time of covid-19
plague where a cashless transaction is preferable.
The study also confirms preceding discoveries
that acquires a stronger effect once the interaction
effect of overall determinants is considered. Yet, the
interaction effect separately to purchase intention
tends to substitute rather than a complementary role,
despite its insignificancy. Therefore, theoretically,
this study does not corroborate the new concepts of
the isolated interaction effects that the previous
study addressed. The disparities of outcome might
be caused by differences in the culture of
respondents that result in distinct behavior. Another
reason that triggers dissimilar findings is that this
study uses Gopay as the context of explaining
promotions, brands, and information quality to
samples when they stumbled on the questionnaire.
This study suggests adding experience as a predictor
and various context in subsequent studies for the
benefits of theories and practices.
REFERENCES
Agusli, D., & Kunto, Y. (2013). Analisa Pengaruh
Dimensi Ekuitas Merek Terhadap Minat Beli
Konsumen Midtown Hotel Surabaya. Jurnal
Manajemen Pemasaran Petra, 1 No.2, 2-3.
https://doi.org/ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1362/147539215X14
441363630837
Arifin, E., & Fachrodji, A. (2015). Pengaruh Persepsi
Kualitas Produk, Citra Merek dan Promosi Terhadap
Minat Beli Konsumen Ban Achilles di Jakarta Selatan.
Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen, 127128.
Akar, E., & Nasir, V. A. (2015). A review of literature on
consumers’ online purchase intentions. Journal of
Customer Behaviour, 14(3), 215–233.
Chang, K., Hsu, C., Chen, M., & Kuo, N. (2017). How a
branded website creates customer purchase intentions.
Total Quality Management & Business Excellence,
30(3–4), 422–446.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1308819
Chen, C., & Chang, Y. (2018). Telematics and Informatics
What drives purchase intention on Airbnb?
Perspectives of consumer reviews, information
quality, and media richness. Telematics and
Purchase Intention of e-Payment: The Substitute or Complementary Role of Brand, Sales Promotions, and Information Quality
307

Informatics, 35(5), 1512–1523.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.03.019
Chesney, T., Chuah, S.-H., Dobele, A. R., & Hoffmann,
R. (2017). Information Richness and Trust in V-
Commerce: Implications for Services Marketing.
Journal of Services Marketing, 31(3), 295–307.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-02-2015-
0099
Chin, P. N., Isa, S. M., & Alodin, Y. (2019). The impact
of endorser and brand credibility on consumers’
purchase intention: the mediating effect of attitude
towards brand and brand credibility. Journal of
Marketing Communications, 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2019.1604561
Davis, K., Maddock, R., & Foo, M. (2017). Catching up
with Indonesia’s fintech industry. Law and Financial
Markets Review, 11(1), 33–40.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2017.1336398
Devita, V. D. (2019, August 12). Siapa Aplikasi E-wallet
dengan Pengguna Terbanyak di Indonesia?
https://iprice.co.id/trend/insights/e-wallet-terbaik-di-
indonesia/
Ferdiana, A. M. K., & Darma, G. S. (2019).
Understanding Fintech Through GoPay. International
Journal of Innovative Science and Research
Technology, 4(2), 257–260.
Franedya, R., & Bosnia, T. (2018, January 10). Ini Dia
Empat Jenis Fintech di Indonesia. CNBC Edukasi
Fintech.
https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/tech/20180110145
800-37-1126/ini-dia-empat-jenis-fintech-di- indonesia
Hair, J., & Anderson, R. (1998). Multivariate Data
Analysis 5th Edition. New York: Prentice Hall
International, Inc.
Hall, J. D., Palsson, C., & Price, J. (2018). Is Uber a
substitute or complement for public transit? Journal of
Urban Economics, 1-6. doi:10.1016/j.jue.2018.09.003
Hasim, M. A., Jabar, J., & Murad, M. A. (2019). A
Preliminary Research on Consumer Acceptance in
Kujath, C. L. (2011). Facebook and MySpace:
Complement or Substitute for Face-to-Face
Interaction? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 14(1-2), 75-78. doi:DOI:
10.1089/cyber.2009.0311
Mady, T. (2017). What makes up intentions to purchase
the pioneer? A theory of reasoned action approach in
India and the USA. International Journal of Emerging
Markets, 13(5), 734–757.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/IJoEM-01-
2017-0007
Putri, A. T. K., & Noer, B. A. (2017). Information
Richness, Retailer Brand, Extended Offers pada Niat
Beli Konsumen Menggunakan T-Cash. Jurnal Sains
Dan Seni ITS, 6(1), 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.12962/j23373520.v6i1.21317
Riduwan, & Akdon. (2006). Rumus dan Data dalam
Aplikasi Statistika. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Santini, F. D. O., Vieira, V. A., Hoffmann, C., & Perin, M.
G. (2016). Meta-Analysis of the Long- and Short- Term
Effects of Sales Promotions on Consumer Behavior.
Journal of Promotion Management, 22(3),425–442.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2016.1154921
Tariq, M., Nawaz, M. & Butt, H. (2013). Customer
Perceptions About Branding and Purchase Intention:
A Study of FMCG in a Emerging Market. Journal of
Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 3 No.2, 341.
Wang, Z., Jiang, Z., Ren, Z., Tang, J., & Yin, D. (2018). A
Path-constrained Framework for Discriminating
Substitutable and Complementary Products in E-
commerce. Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM
International Conference on Web Search and Data
Mining (pp. 619-627). Marina Del Rey: WSDM.
doi:10.1145/3159652.3159710
Yen, Y. S. (2014). The interaction effect on customer
purchase intention in e-commerce: A comparison
between substitute and complement. Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 26(3), 472–493.
https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-07-2013-0080
ICAESS 2020 - The International Conference on Applied Economics and Social Science
308