Understanding Adoption of PELNI Mobile: Effects of Barriers, Quality, Trust, and Value

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33650/jeecom.v8i2.17280
Authors

(1)  Anggita Allaudia Sudradjad   (Universitas Negeri Surabaya)  
        Indonesia
(2) * Anggraeni Widya Purwita   (Universitas Negeri Surabaya)  
        Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


The increasing number of PT PELNI passengers, reaching 5.15 million in 2025, has not been matched by a shift toward digital ticketing: PELNI Mobile is used by only about 10% of the national passenger base, indicating resistance among prospective users' adoption intention toward maritime mobile ticketing. This study examines effects of Usage Barrier, Risk Barrier, and Information Quality on Trust; Information Quality on Perceived Value; and Trust and Perceived Value on Adoption Intention, integrating Innovation Resistance Theory (IRT) with information quality dimensions to explain trust formation in early adoption of a historically conventional maritime service. Data were collected via purposive sampling from 281 national respondents who use PELNI's sea services, are aware of PELNI Mobile, but have not used it, analyzed using SEM-PLS 4. The model explains 62.7% of variance in Trust, 72.5% in Perceived Value, and 71.7% in Adoption Intention, with good predictive relevance (Q²predict > 0); six of seven hypotheses were supported. Information Quality was the strongest predictor of Trust (β = 0.688; p = 0.000), while Risk Barrier was a significant barrier (β = -0.239; p = 0.000), far more influential than Usage Barrier, which had no significant effect (β = -0.011; p = 0.852). Perceived Value was the most dominant predictor of Adoption Intention (β = 0.666; p = 0.000). These results show that in early digital maritime adoption, transaction-security concerns shape trust more than usability complexity, a novelty distinguishing this study from other transport-adoption research, with implications for IRT and PELNI's digital adoption efforts.


Keywords

Adoption Intention; Innovation Resistance Theory (IRT); PELNI Mobile; Digital Maritime Ticketing; Sustainable Adoption



Full Text: PDF



References


Badan Pusat Statistik, “Statistik Transportasi Laut 2024,” 2025, Accessed: Aug. 17, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.bps.go.id/id/publication/2025/12/01/fdc6de7c2b34aa9b109edcad/statistik-transportasi-laut-2024.html

PT PELNI, “PELNI Going Extra Miles: Beyond The Target,” 2025.

D. R. Utama, M. Hamsal, S. B. Abdinagoro, and R. K. Rahim, “Developing a digital transformation maturity model for port assessment in archipelago countries: The Indonesian case,” Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect., vol. 26, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.trip.2024.101146.

PT PELNI, “Berganti Kepemimpinan, Ini Daftar Transformasi PELNI di Bawah Tri Andayani’,” PELNI. Accessed: Aug. 18, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.pelni.co.id/berganti-kepemimpinan-ini-daftar-transformasi-pelni-di-bawah-tri-andayani

PT PELNI, “PELNI Dorong Pemudik Pesan Tiket di Aplikasi PELNI Mobile,” PELNI. Accessed: Aug. 18, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.pelni.co.id/pelni-dorong-pemudik-pesan-tiket-di-aplikasi-pelni-mobile

C. C. Chen, C. H. Chang, and K. L. Hsiao, “Exploring the factors of using mobile ticketing applications: Perspectives from innovation resistance theory,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, vol. 67, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102974.

M. N. Labiba, D. R. Mutiara, R. Shadrina, P. W. Handayani, and N. C. Harahap, “Exploring the Barriers to Public Transport App Adoption Using Innovation Resistance Theory,” Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Business Intelligence, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 293–310, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.20473/jisebi.11.2.293-310.

S. Owusu-Agyemang, R. A. Simons, M. Henning, and M. Marshall, “Transit made Easy: Examining the adoption and impact of mobile fare payment technology among bus riders,” Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect., vol. 25, May 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.trip.2024.101086.

A. W. Purwita, E. A. Elfaiz, and A. Rahmaningrum, “Teachers and Technology Acceptance: The Role of Digital Literacy, Technology Anxiety, and Cognitive Perceptions in Prediction Behavioral Intention,” in 2025 9th International Conference on Information Technology, Information Systems and Electrical Engineering (ICITISEE), IEEE, Dec. 2025, pp. 66–71. doi: 10.1109/ICITISEE68184.2025.11355052.

C. Li, N. Khaliq, L. Chinove, U. Khaliq, and J. Oláh, “Consumers’ Perception of Risk Facets Associated With Fintech Use: Evidence From Pakistan,” Sage Open, vol. 13, no. 4, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.1177/21582440231200199.

C. H. Liu, Y. T. Chen, S. Kittikowit, T. Hongsuchon, and Y. J. Chen, “Using Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology to Evaluate the Impact of a Mobile Payment App on the Shopping Intention and Usage Behavior of Middle-Aged Customers,” Front. Psychol., vol. 13, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.830842.

G. Migliore, R. Wagner, F. S. Cechella, and F. Liébana-Cabanillas, “Antecedents to the Adoption of Mobile Payment in China and Italy: an Integration of UTAUT2 and Innovation Resistance Theory,” Information Systems Frontiers, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 2099–2122, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10796-021-10237-2.

E. Sulistiyani, B. M. Izzati, and A. W. Purwita, “The Moderating Role of Digital Financial Literacy on FinTech Adoption: A Case Study of ShopeePay,” in 2024 Seventh International Conference on Vocational Education and Electrical Engineering (ICVEE), IEEE, Oct. 2024, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/ICVEE63912.2024.10823820.

S. ; Ram and J. N. Sheth, “Consumer Resistance to Innovations: The Marketing Problem and Its Solutions,” 1989.

W. H. DeLone and E. R. Mclean, “The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update,” 2003.

P. Kaur, A. Dhir, N. Singh, G. Sahu, and M. Almotairi, “An innovation resistance theory perspective on mobile payment solutions,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, vol. 55, p. 102059, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102059.

A. Abd Aziz et al., “Factors Influencing Information Quality of Information Systems: A Systematic Literature Review,” 2024. [Online]. Available: www.joiv.org/index.php/joiv

A. J. Desmal, M. K. Othman, S. Hamid, and A. Zolait, “Exploring the information quality of mobile government services: a literature review,” PeerJ Comput. Sci., vol. 8, 2022, doi: 10.7717/PEERJ-CS.1028.

N. Dube and M. Humbani, “Testing a modified information system success model in a mobile travel app context,” Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, vol. 90, no. 6, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.1002/isd2.12339.

“Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 27 Tahun 2022 Tentang Perlindungan Data Pribadi,” 2022.

D. H. Mcknight, V. Choudhury, and C. Kacmar, “Developing and Validating Trust Measures for E-Commerce: An Integrative Typology,” 2002.

H. M. Dawood, C. Y. Liew, and T. C. Lau, “Mobile perceived trust mediation on the intention and adoption of FinTech innovations using mobile technology: A systematic literature review,” F1000Res., vol. 10, p. 1252, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.12688/f1000research.74656.1.

N. Singh, R. Misra, W. Quan, A. Radic, S. M. Lee, and H. Han, “An analysis of consumer’s trusting beliefs towards the use of e-commerce platforms,” Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun., vol. 11, no. 1, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1057/s41599-024-03395-6.

J. C. Sweeney and G. N. Soutar, “Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale,” Journal of Retailing, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 203–220, 2001, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00041-0.

P. Deng, W. Yan, Y. Yu, Y. Zhang, and L. Zhang, “The attitude of online fans: perceived value, expectation, and identification on VAR satisfaction,” Front. Psychol., vol. 14, 2024, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1288998.

P. Xiao, Y. Sun, Y. Chen, and X. Wang, “Influence of platform satisfaction on the willingness to use a new platform,” Sci. Rep., vol. 14, no. 1, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-79085-9.

F. D. Davis, “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–340, Sep. 1989, doi: 10.2307/249008.

I. Ajzen, “The theory of planned behavior,” Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process., vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 179–211, Dec. 1991, doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.

J. F. Hair, G. T. M. Hult, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, “A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.),” 2021.

J. F. . Hair, G. T. M. . Hult, C. M. . Ringle, and Marko. Sarstedt, A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications, Inc., 2022.

J. W. Creswell and J. D. Creswell, “Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.),” 2018.

T. Laukkanen, “Consumer adoption versus rejection decisions in seemingly similar service innovations: The case of the Internet and mobile banking,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 69, Feb. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.013.

J. Hair and A. Alamer, “Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example,” Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, vol. 1, no. 3, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027.

M. Blut, D. Chaney, R. Lunardo, R. Mencarelli, and D. Grewal, “Customer Perceived Value: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis,” J. Serv. Res., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 501–524, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1177/10946705231222295.

J. Henseler, C. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, “A New Criterion for Assessing Discriminant Validity in Variance-based Structural Equation Modeling,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 43, pp. 115–135, Jan. 2015, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.


Dimensions, PlumX, and Google Scholar Metrics

10.33650/jeecom.v8i2.17280


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 Anggita Allaudia Sudradjad

 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer (JEECOM)
Published by LP3M Nurul Jadid University, Indonesia, Probolinggo, East Java, Indonesia.