Fintech: Evidence of the Urgent Need to Improve Financial Literacy in Portugal

IF 3 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Mariana Costa, Manuel Au-Yong-Oliveira, Ana Moreira
{"title":"Fintech: Evidence of the Urgent Need to Improve Financial Literacy in Portugal","authors":"Mariana Costa, Manuel Au-Yong-Oliveira, Ana Moreira","doi":"10.3390/admsci14050099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fintech has revolutionized the financial sector, providing a new way of providing banking services. Since Fintech can provide the same services as traditional banks but entirely online, it is a competitor. As a result, consumers’ relationships with banking have inevitably changed, and it is therefore relevant to analyze these changes. The main objective of this study is to understand people’s perceptions of Fintech, their level of knowledge about it, and the impact of its emergence on traditional banking. The study sample consisted of 174 participants. A quantitative methodology was used to test the hypotheses formulated. The results show that participants who know about Fintech and perceive it as safe have a greater intention of changing banks. On the other hand, they perceive that supervision and regulation in traditional banks is higher than in Fintech. Among the reasons for becoming a Fintech customer, the most mentioned were lower costs and the fact that they provide greater convenience and ease of use. It will be in Fintech’s interest to continue working with regulators so that the sector makes progress in this area and consumers can recognize greater equality between traditional banks and Fintech in the future.","PeriodicalId":30376,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Sciences","volume":"62 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14050099","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fintech has revolutionized the financial sector, providing a new way of providing banking services. Since Fintech can provide the same services as traditional banks but entirely online, it is a competitor. As a result, consumers’ relationships with banking have inevitably changed, and it is therefore relevant to analyze these changes. The main objective of this study is to understand people’s perceptions of Fintech, their level of knowledge about it, and the impact of its emergence on traditional banking. The study sample consisted of 174 participants. A quantitative methodology was used to test the hypotheses formulated. The results show that participants who know about Fintech and perceive it as safe have a greater intention of changing banks. On the other hand, they perceive that supervision and regulation in traditional banks is higher than in Fintech. Among the reasons for becoming a Fintech customer, the most mentioned were lower costs and the fact that they provide greater convenience and ease of use. It will be in Fintech’s interest to continue working with regulators so that the sector makes progress in this area and consumers can recognize greater equality between traditional banks and Fintech in the future.
金融科技:葡萄牙急需提高金融知识的证据
金融科技彻底改变了金融业,提供了一种新的银行服务方式。由于金融科技可以提供与传统银行相同的服务,但完全是在线提供,因此它是竞争对手。因此,消费者与银行的关系不可避免地发生了变化,分析这些变化也就具有了现实意义。本研究的主要目的是了解人们对金融科技的看法、了解程度以及金融科技的出现对传统银行业务的影响。研究样本由 174 名参与者组成。研究采用定量方法对提出的假设进行检验。结果显示,了解金融科技并认为其安全的参与者有更多更换银行的意愿。另一方面,他们认为传统银行的监督和监管高于金融科技银行。在成为金融科技客户的原因中,提及最多的是成本较低,以及它们提供了更大的便利性和易用性。继续与监管机构合作符合金融科技公司的利益,这样该行业才能在这一领域取得进步,消费者才能在未来认识到传统银行与金融科技公司之间更加平等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
151
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信