Factors Influencing the Adoption of FinTech for the Enhancement of Financial Inclusion in Rural India Using a Mixed Methods Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Evaluation of "Factors Influencing FinTech Adoption to Enhance Financial Inclusion in Rural India Using a Mixed-Methods Approach: A Path Towards Sustainable Development"

Introduction to the review

The manuscript contains 25 publishing pages (955 rows), 1 figures, 7 tables, and 96 bibliographic sources. The text is divided in 6 section (some with subsections), including Introduction and Conclusions. The abstract content is according to the editorial requirements and clearly shows the substantive and scientific components of the study. As a leading objective of the study, I see the development of strategies to bridge the financial inclusion gap to support sustainable economic development in rural communities in India. Thus, by using a mixed method research method (with quantitative and qualitative approaches), the aim is to argue for practical recommendations to the group of policymakers, financial institutions and FinTech service providers. These recommendations should lead to improved access to and use of digital financial services in rural India.

 

• What is the main question addressed by the research?

The main question addressed in this study is to understand the factors that influence the adoption of financial technology (FinTech) to improve financial inclusion in rural India. The study focuses on exploring the technological, psychological and socio-cultural factors that influence this adoption. Three theoretical frameworks are applied: firstly, the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Secondly, the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is used and thirdly, the Technology Readiness Index (TRI) is applied. The author aims to analyze how these factors influence the intention to adopt and use financial technology among different demographic segments of the rural population. The manuscript also seeks to understand how the findings of the study can be applied by policymakers and financial institutions to improve financial inclusion in rural India. This broadens the research horizon to the fundamental question of whether and how the adoption of financial technologies can contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals by promoting financial inclusion and reducing inequalities in rural communities.

 

• Do you consider the topic original or relevant to the field?

Analyzing the topic from the point of view of its relevance and originality in the field of financial technologies and inclusion, several significant aspects can be highlighted in support of the claim of original and up-to-date research. By applying an integrated approach combining the TAM, TPB and TRI models (see Figure 1), the author demonstrates a mathematically sound methodology for assessing the interaction between the various variables influencing the adoption of financial technologies. The methodological basis with structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), which is combined with qualitative comparative analysis with fuzzy sets, is a solid framework for achieving a quantitative assessment of the interrelationships between the studied parameters. The ten formulated hypotheses are an extremely high challenge and definitely exceed the standard limit of problematization in one article. The author definitely strives to solve multiple problems in one study, which deserves admiration, but also raises difficulties.

 

• What specific improvements should the authors consider regarding the methodology?

From a mathematical point of view, the approach of integrating multiple theoretical constructs into one model allows for a more precise measurement of the interactions between different factors. I believe that the statistical significance of the results is supported by high values ​​of the coefficients of determination (R²). The reliability and significance indicators of the applied hypothesis tests confirm the validity of the author's model for studying the problem posed. This confirms the original foundation of the study in the direction of choosing a methodology on the one hand and leading the variables with defining the mathematical relationships between them on the other. It is precisely such a scientific approach that categorically allows for the creation of a prognostic model with high practical applicability for the addressees of this study already indicated above.

From the analysis of the research methodology, I can suggest several possible improvements of an optional but recommended nature:

First. Collecting data at different time points would allow for a better understanding of the dynamics of financial technology adoption and tracking changes in user behavior over time.

Second. I find it interesting to look for the relationship between educational level or digital literacy moderating the relationship between perceived usefulness and intention to use FinTech.

Third. The sample of 433 respondents (providing the baseline analysis) could be increased to achieve better representation of the different demographic groups in rural India.

Fourth. Cross-regional analysis in India, with cultural and socio-economic differences between states, could definitely enrich the study on financial technology adoption or could be considered as an opportunity for future follow-up research by the author.

 

• Are the references appropriate?

A total of 57 sources are from the period 2020-2025, which represents about 59.4% of all 96 cited sources. Per editorial years the latest bibliographical sources are distributed as follows: 2004 – 11 titles, 2023 – 13 titles, 2022 - 7 titles, 2021 – 17 sources and 2020 – 9 sources. I conclude that the authors have included an acceptable number of current studies in their literature review. The bibliographical sources from earlier periods are solid and theoretically important for the philosophy and scope of the paper. If there are more appropriate contemporary studies from the MDPI publishing network then the authors could improve the references list giving us the prove for the ability to create horizontal and interdisciplinary exchange of scientific research and achievements within a broad front of modern topics of the science.

 

• Any additional comments on the tables and figures.

In Table 3 on pages 13-14 (Measurement Properties), the presentation of the correlation matrix is ​​numerically adequate, but color-coding or a heat map could be added to more illustratively perceive the strength of the correlations. Additionally, the inclusion of confidence intervals for the factor weights would increase the informative value of the analysis. Оn page 17 the table number should be number 7, not number 4! In general, the visualization of the results is at a highly professional level.

 

Conclusion

The manuscript is definitely a contribution to the field of the role of financial technology in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. In conclusion, I believe that the manuscript represents a thorough and methodologically sound study of the factors influencing the adoption of financial technology in rural India. It successfully integrates three theoretical frameworks to create a comprehensive model for analysis. This is achieved by exploring an extremely rich and contemporary bibliographic foundation of research in the problem area. By applying mixed methods of analysis, a more complete understanding of the complex interrelationships between the variables studied is achieved. I find the recommendations for improving financial inclusion valuable and practically applicable. Overall, the connection between theoretical concepts and empirical applications is very impressive. This will definitely contribute to the broader discussion on the collaboration between financial technology and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. I foresee that this article will be a foundation for future research on the issue, both by the author and other researchers.

 

 

 

Author Response

The reviewer comments are addressed in the attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. Title and Abstract

1.1Title

While clear, the title could be more concise. Consider removing “A Path Towards Sustainable Development” unless it is a major focus of the study.

1.2 Abstract 

The abstract should concisely outline the research objectives, methodology, key findings, and practical implications. It should provide a clear snapshot of the entire paper, capturing its core contributions. Additionally, it should detail the mixed-methods approach, specifying which methods were used and the rationale behind their selection.

2.Introduction and Literature Review

2.1 Research Problem

(1)Lack of clear definition of financial inclusion challenges.The introduction should clearly define financial inclusion challenges in rural India, such as limited banking access, financial illiteracy, and poor infrastructure, while explaining how FinTech can address these issues.

(2)Unclear context and relevance.The introduction needs to better establish the broader context of financial inclusion in rural India. While it is known that financial inclusion is a major issue in developing countries, the paper should provide data or context about the particular situation in rural India, such as the percentage of the population without access to banking, or the specific barriers rural areas face compared to urban centers.

(3)Unspecified research gaps.The research problem should clearly outline gaps in the existing literature. While FinTech adoption is a growing topic, the paper should specify why studying it in the rural Indian context is necessary. What is missing in the current literature regarding rural India and FinTech? Does the study address an underexplored aspect, such as specific adoption barriers, or the unique socio-cultural factors influencing rural populations?

2.2Literature Review

(1)Insufficient coverage of relevant literature.The literature review may not sufficiently cover studies on FinTech adoption in rural India. Expand the literature review, including more studies that specifically focus on FinTech adoption in rural India, and address challenges like infrastructure, financial literacy, and social factors that are unique to rural areas.

(2)Lack of detailed discussion on theoretical frameworks.The paper should clearly outline and discuss theoretical frameworks guiding FinTech adoption research, such as Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), and the Technology Readiness Index (TRI), and explain how they inform the study of FinTech adoption in rural India. Make sure the theoretical models are well-aligned with the research questions and context.

(3)Limited discussion of the mixed-methods approach. The literature review may not provide enough discussion on the value and relevance of using a mixed-methods approach in studying FinTech adoption. The paper should discuss the value of mixed-methods, emphasizing the advantages of using a mixed-methods approach to study FinTech adoption in rural areas, Explaining how combining quantitative data (e.g., adoption rates) with qualitative insights (e.g., user experiences) provides a richer and more nuanced understanding.

(4) Failure to ddentify research gaps. The paper should clearly articulate the gaps in the current literature, particularly in terms of how FinTech adoption is studied in rural India. Position the current study as filling these gaps, particularly with the use of a mixed-methods approach.

3.Research Questions and Hypotheses

(1)Lack of clear theoretical basis for hypotheses. The hypotheses should be logically based on the literature and theoretical frameworks discussed.However, the paper may not clearly demonstrate how the hypotheses are based on existing theories or previous research findings. Please derive hypotheses from theory, ensuring that the hypotheses are clearly derived from the literature and theoretical frameworks. For example, if TAM or TPBis used, hypotheses should reflect the key components of these models (e.g., perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, etc.).

(2)Unclear or overly broad hypotheses. The hypotheses might be too broad or vague, making them difficult to test effectively.For example, a hypothesis like "Higher socio-economic status leads to greater FinTech adoption" may be true in general, but it lacks specificity. The variables involved (e.g., socio-economic status, education level) should be more clearly defined, and the expected relationships should be more precisely stated. The hypotheses should specify the direction of relationships. (e.g., "increased education level positively influences FinTech adoption").

(3)Failure to capture key factors. The hypotheses might miss out on important factors that influence FinTech adoption in rural India. For example, psychological factors like trust in digital platforms, perceived ease of use, or perceived usefulness should be explicitly included in the hypotheses. If the hypotheses focus only on socio-economic or technological factors, they fail to capture the full complexity of adoption processes, particularly in a rural context.

4.Methodology

The paper adopts a mixed-methods approach but does not clearly justify its choice over a single-method approach.The rationale for combining quantitative and qualitative methods should be explicitly outlined. For example, the paper should explain how the combination of both methods helps provide a more comprehensive understanding of FinTech adoption, especially in the rural Indian context.

Clearly explain why a mixed-methods approach was chosen and how it will help provide a more comprehensive understanding of the research problem. Discuss the complementary nature of both methods.

5.Results and Discussion

(1) Link results to research questions and hypotheses: Interpret the results in relation to the research questions and hypotheses. Clearly explain how the findings support or contradict the hypotheses and how they contribute to answering the research questions.

(2) Discuss practical implications for rural financial inclusion: Provide clear, actionable recommendations to enhance rural financial inclusion.Highlight how the findings can be applied to policy, service design, or community engagement in rural areas.

Author Response

Kindly see the attachment.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The rationale for the study is clearly stated: It is seen that the banking infrastructure in rural areas in India is weak. This causes a significant portion of the population to remain outside the financial system. While existing academic studies generally focus on urban areas, technology use behaviors in rural areas are not comprehensively addressed.

 This study investigates public acceptance trends of financial technology services in rural India using three theoretical frameworks such as Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and Technology Readiness Index (TRI).

The study aims to bring effective suggestions to policy makers to facilitate the adoption of digital financial services in rural areas.

In the research, mixed-methods consisting of quantitative and qualitative data collection techniques were used.

Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) and Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) were used to analyze the data.

Main results of the papers are: Usability and Convenience of FinTech: According to the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the usefulness and accessibility of FinTech services increases their usage rate.

Psychological and Social Factors: According to the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), individuals' attitudes directly affect the use of FinTech.

Security Concerns: According to the Technology Readiness Index (TRI), security concerns and distrust of technology negatively reflect on the use of Fin-tech.

Impact on Financial Inclusion: The use of FinTech increases individuals' participation in the financial system.

Originality: This study is among the first academic studies to address FinTech adoption as a whole with three theoretical frameworks.  While previous studies were based on a single theory, this research brings together technology acceptance, behavioral factors and security concerns. Additionally, using PLS-SEM and fsQCA methods together provides a broader perspective on FinTech usage.

The reseach has some policy implications on digital literacy programs, security and data protection, Infrastructure Investments and Financial Incentives.

Besides the paper refers to SDG8, SDG 10 and SDG 11.

In general the paper’s design is successful. However, the authors should put evidence whether the sample of the research (433) is sufficient to reflect the population. And, I advise the author/s can improve the methodology.  

Author Response

Kindly see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The new version addresses the concerns raised by the reviewers, and the modifications made are appropriate.