Building Control in Digital Finance: How Self-Efficacy and Mobile Banking Quality Shape Responsible Financial Behavior under Privacy Concerns

http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 1 Building Control in Digital Finance: How Self-Efficacy and Mobile Banking Quality Shape Responsible Financial Behavior under Privacy Concerns Muhammad Ahmad (Corresponding Author) VSBTechnical University Ostrava Email: [email protected] Ibrar Khan School of Economics Finance and Banking, Universiti Utara Malaysia Email: [email protected] Ramaisa Aqdas Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, Iqra University, Karachi Email: ramaisa.aqda[email protected] Saeed Abbas Shah (Corresponding Author) Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, Sukkur IBA University Email: [email protected] This research paper investigates the relationship between digital financial selfefficacy mobile banking quality and responsible financial behavior mediated by perceived financial control and moderated by the digital privacy concern. Based on a three-wave time-lagged integrity, and data of 415 mobile banking users in Pakistan, PLS-SEM findings demonstrate that digital financial self-efficacy, as well as mobile banking quality, have a significant positive impact on perceived financial control which in turn, is a strong predictor of responsible financial behavior. The predictors are corroborated to mediate the effects, and the effect of digital privacy concern is negative in moderating the effect of perceived financial control on responsible financial behavior. CVPAT exhibits better predictive when it comes to the PLS-SEM model. These results contribute to the theory of digital finance and have informational prospects of enhancing user ability, platform quality, and privacy guarantee. Keywords: Digital Financial Self-Efficacy, Mobile Banking Quality, Responsible Financial Behavior, Perceived Financial Control, Digital Privacy Concern Introduction The boom of online financial services has transformed consumer habits and financial decision making and access to financial resources especially in the emerging markets. Mobile banking apps, digital wallets, and branchless banking systems have come to the center of the financial engagement and empower users to carry out financial A B S T R A C T http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 2 transactions with more convenient and rapidity than ever before. However, researchers are increasingly discussing the idea that the success of digital finance does not only rely on technology but on the psychological processes with the help of which people perceive and use digital financial instruments (Arora and Rahman, 2023; Gomber et al., 2023). In this respect, perceived financial control as the perception that an individual has the ability to handle the financial decision-making process effectively has become a decisive factor in responsible financial behavior and lifetime financial welfare (Zestcott et al., 2023). Digital financial transformation in Pakistan has been quickened by programs like Raast, Easypaisa, JazzCash and mobile banking systems that have the support of the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP, 2023). Equivalent to the growing access, great behavioral difficulties still exist. Digital access is not yet translated into a prudent financial behavior by many users, in part because of the low financial capability and mistrust, as well as the complexity of digital tools (Ahmed and Dissanayake, 2024; Hassan et al., 2024). These issues point to the fact that responsible financial conduct is strongly correlated with the possibility of people getting a sense of control over the financial choices they take when they employ digital systems. There are two important factors that are critical in determining perceived financial control. First, Digital Financial Self-Efficacy (DFSE) gives an indication of the belief of individuals to carry out a digital financial task. This is demonstrated through the fact that an increase in self-efficacy enhances digital decision-making, information processing, and behavioral consequences (Ryu et al., 2024; Yusuf and Mohd-Satar, 2023). Second, the Mobile Banking Quality (MBQ) such as reliability, usability, information accuracy, and security minimize uncertainty and increase the digital user competence (Addai et al., 2024). Although the literature is on the increase, there is a dearth of research that combines both factors to determine the contribution of the two factors to increased perceived financial control in digital finance. Moreover, even though perceived financial control is theoretically connected with responsible financial behavior, Digital Privacy Concern (DPC) might alter this relationship. Privacy issue is also turning out to be one of the biggest obstacles to digital finance usage, which lower trust and create vulnerabilities (Maruping et al., 2023; Khalid and Ali, 2024). Users that believe their information can be used in inappropriate ways might be reluctant to participate conscientiously online even when they think they are financially competent. The proposed study is grounded on the Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986) and financial capability view (Shim et al., 2010) in the following way: the digital financial self-efficacy and mobile banking quality have a positive impact on the perceived financial control, which subsequently has a positive impact on the responsible financial behavior, with the digital privacy concern moderating the relationship between the two. The research has value in the sense that the perceived financial control is placed in the heart of the study as a mediating variable between digital aptitude and system quality with the financial behavior and (b) it has shown that individual and system variables interactively to mediate between the perceived control and the financial behavior and (c) it has also introduced the privacy concern as a case condition as to whether the perceived financial control will translate to responsible financial behavior or not. http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 3 Research Questions RQ1: Does digital financial self-efficacy influence perceived financial control? RQ2: Does mobile banking quality influence perceived financial control? RQ3: Does perceived financial control influence responsible financial behavior? RQ4: Does digital privacy concern moderate the relationship between perceived financial control and responsible financial behavior? RQ5: Does perceived financial control mediate the relationship of digital financial self-efficacy with responsible financial behavior RQ6: Does perceived financial control mediate the relationship of mobile banking quality with responsible financial behavior Research Objectives RO1: To examine the effect of digital financial self-efficacy on perceived financial control. RO2: To assess the effect of mobile banking quality on perceived financial control. RO3: To analyses the influence of perceived financial control on responsible financial behavior. RO4: To evaluate the moderating role of digital privacy concern between perceived financial control and responsible financial behavior. RQ5: To assess mediating role of perceived financial control between digital financial self-efficacy and responsible financial behavior RQ6: To examine the mediating role of perceived financial control between mobile banking quality and responsible financial behavior Literature Review Digital financial self-efficacy has become widely accepted as one of the fundamental determinants of digital financial involvement. Self-efficacy improves confidence, resilience, and performance of tasks in the digital environment, which is based on Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986). Recent reports affirm the presence of positive links between increased digital financial self-efficacy and the enhancement of technological engagement and quality of digital transactions (Ryu et al., 2024; Yusuf and Mohd-Satar, 2023). Nonetheless, the study has not provided adequate research into the role of this in determining perceived financial control, one of the psychological constructs that are related to effective financial decision making. Mobile banking quality is the environment at the system level that facilitates the digital financial activities. Mobile banking systems of high quality, i.e. reliable, secure, responsive, and easy to work with interfaces, improve consumer competence and decrease operation anxiety (Addai et al., 2024). A well-integrated and safe system would lessen cognitive load, making users more confident in their online finances, but the effect of such systems on perceived financial control is little researched. The perception of financial control is the subjective belief that people have control over financial decision making. Previous research has defined its use in budgeting http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 4 forecasting, saving, and wise financial decisions (Zestcott et al., 2023). Technological complexity and risk make control an even more severe problem in digital environments. Research on the role of digital self-efficacy and service quality in financial control is, however, scanty. Lastly, there is the issue of digital privacy which has become a significant hurdle to the adoption of digital finance. It lowers the level of trust, makes one feel vulnerable, and hampers positive financial practices (Maruping et al., 2023; Khalid and Ali, 2024). The issue of privacy can make a person fail to be responsible in the online space even when he/she feels capable and in control. The moderating effect of privacy concern on the relationship between perceived financial control and responsible financial behavior is mostly not studied. Hypotheses Development Digital Financial Self-EfficacyPerceived Financial Control Digital financial efficacy is the level of belief concerning how the individuals handle the digital financial tools, how they engage in making transactions online and how they are able to resolve technical issues. This is because the Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986) hypothesizes that the self-efficacy enhances perceived ability, reduction in uncertainty, and empowerment in relation to mastery of task performance. In online finance, individuals who have high self-efficacy view information effectively and make financial decisions in a more transparent and assertive way. As per past research, individuals who are more digitally engaged are self-efficacious users that have a higher level of psychological readiness to manage financial operations (Ryu et al., 2024; Yusuf and Mohd-Satar, 2023). In this way, selfefficacy will experience greater assumed monetary control. H1: Digital financial self-efficacy positively influences perceived financial control. Mobile Banking QualityPerceived Financial Control Mobile banking quality includes reliability of application, information precision, and ease of use, speed and security. Quality digital platforms are less demanding, more transparent, and offer a reliable setting to make financial decisions. Empirical data indicate that high-quality mobile banking services increase the level of confidence, satisfaction, and perceived competence of the users (Addai et al., 2024). Users are likely to feel that they have control over their online financial transactions when they have pleasant, safe, and user-understandable experiences in their mobile banking transactions. In this way, the quality of mobile banking is likely to enhance the perceived financial control. H2: Mobile banking quality positively influences perceived financial control. Perceived Financial ControlResponsible Financial Behavior Perceived financial control is a belief that a person can handle her or his financial decisions well and control finances. The studies always conclude that perceived control is linked to strong predicted disciplined budgeting, saving, and less impulsivity, as well as other responsible financial behaviors (Zestcott et al., 2023). When using digital finance applications, users who perceive themselves as financially empowered will increase their chances of incorporating secure transactions, tracking http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 5 their expenses, saving, and employing risky digital practices. Thus, the perceived financial control will stimulate responsible financial actions. H3: Perceived financial control positively influences responsible financial behavior. Perceived Financial Control mediates the relationship between Digital Financial Self-Efficacy and Responsible Financial Behavior Digital financial self-efficacy boosts users with confidence in making digital transactions, moving around with mobile applications, and handling financial data. But, its influence on actual behavior is delivered mainly by psychological processes. Perceived financial control is the most important channel via which self-efficacy is converted into responsible behavior. People with a high level of digital self-efficacy believe that they are more competent, which makes them have a better chance of having financial control, and eventually, they become responsible in terms of budgets, savings, and transactions (Zestcott et al., 2023; Ryu et al., 2024). Therefore, this route is supposed to be mediated by perceived financial control. H4a: Perceived financial control mediates the relationship between digital financial self-efficacy and responsible financial behavior. Perceived Financial Control mediates the relationship between Mobile Banking Quality and Responsible Financial Behavior Mobile banking quality has a secure, reliable, and easy to use environment that facilitates the financial decision-making of the users. Good digital platforms minimize uncertainties and enhance the perception of people as in control of financial operations. The perception of the mobile banking system as reliable and effective gives users more strength and a sense of control, increasing their risk-taking in disciplined financial behaviors, such as saving and budgeting (Addai et al., 2024; Zestcott et al., 2023). Thus, the perceived financial control is likely to mediate the effect of mobile banking quality on responsible financial behavior. H4b: Perceived financial control mediates the relationship between mobile banking quality and responsible financial behavior. Moderation – Digital Privacy Concern Digital privacy concern this is the fear that an individual or personal or financial information will be exploited, abused, or accessed without permission. Much privacy concern contributes to a perceived sense of vulnerability and lowers the desire to perform digital financial transactions (Maruping et al., 2023; Khalid and Ali, 2024). High privacy concern can result in people not engaging in responsible digital actions even in the situations when they have the financial power due to the fear of oversight (e.g., checking their transactions on a regular basis) or the utilization of digital budgeting programs. Thus, the perceived financial control effect on responsible behavior is likely to be undermined by privacy concern. H5: Digital privacy concern negatively moderates the relationship between perceived financial control and responsible financial behavior. http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 6 Figure # 01: Conceptual Model Methodology Research Design The research design used three-wave time-lagged survey design so that the common method bias could be reduced and the independent variables, the mediator, the moderator, and the dependent variable should have a time gap. These designs are popularly suggested in behavioral and digital finance studies due to their lessening of self-report inflation, enhanced causal inference, and more reliable performance over time of tapping into psychological processes (Podsakoff et al., 2012). The sample population was active mobile banking users in Pakistan since they are individuals who have been exposed the most too digital financial decision-making. The design of the three waves enabled a predictor, psychological mechanism, and behavioral outcome measurement in a sequential way in a structured manner that was aligned with the theoretical framework of the study. Data Collection Procedure The data gathering was performed in three waves with a two-week break in between to allow sufficient differentiation of time and keep the respondents occupied. During the first wave (T1), the measures of Digital Financial Self-Efficacy (DFSE) and Mobile Banking Quality (MBQ) were administered to the participants, capturing the individual-level and system-level digital antecedent digital. Two weeks later respondents were again contacted to do Wave 2 (T2), the scale that included only the Perceived Financial Control (PFC) scale. Such a time gap makes the mediator measured following the predictors according to the principles of testing mediation. Wave 3 (T3) was then followed by another two-week interval during which the respondents took measures of Responsible Financial Behavior (RFB) and Digital Privacy Concern (DPC). A self-generated unique identification code was used by the http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 7 respondents to identify answers in the waves without revealing their identity. Ethical consent was taken before the data was collected and the participants were made aware of confidentiality, voluntary participation and their right to withdraw. Sample Size Since the model is quite complex, since it involves mediation and moderation, the study utilized the PLS-SEM sample size regulations that focus on the minimum power (Hair et al., 2022). At least 350 matched responses were needed to provide sufficient statistical power in order to identify medium effects sizes. Taking into account anticipated attrition in multi-wave studies, at Wave 1, about 450 respondents were recruited. This plan meant that two rounds of attritions saw the final sample exceeding the suggested limit of sound structural equation and hypothesis testing. Data Analysis Technique SmartPLS 4 was used to analyze data, which is the two-step method suggested by PLS-SEM. The measurement model was evaluated based on internal consistency reliability (Cronbach Alpha and Composite Reliability = 0.70 and above), convergent validity (factor loadings = 0.60 and above and AVE = 0.50 and above) as well as discriminant validity (Fornell-Larcker = -0.85 and above and HTMT ratio = -0.85 and above) in the first step. The second step involved the test of the structural model with 10,000 bootstrapped subsamples to test direct, indirect (mediation), and interaction (moderation) effects. The model explanatory power (R2), the effect size (f2) and the predictive relevance (Q2) were analyzed and PLSpredict was applied to verify the out-of-sample predictive accuracy. This method of analysis is consistent with the best practices of digital finance behavioral research. Measurement & Instrumentation (With Original Scale References & Number of Items) The measurement of all constructs was done on a seven point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree 7 = strongly agree). The instruments have been modified based on well-established scales that have high psychometric validity. DFSE was a scale designed to assess the digital financial self-efficacy in the form of five items based on the self-efficacy theory attributed by Bandura (1986) and adjusted to the specifics of digital finance by Ryu et al. (2024). These points measure the trust of people in the fulfillment of digital transactions, navigation of mobile interfaces, and solving problems in digital financial environments. The Mobile banking quality (MBQ) was assessed based on six items of the mobile banking service quality scale of Addai et al. (2024). Such a measure encompasses such features as reliability, security, responsiveness, and usability and informational accuracy that are crucial measurements of digital service quality in new markets. The Perceived Financial Control (PFC) was assessed using four items that have been borrowed by Zestcott et al. (2023). The scale indicates the perception of the people on the capability of handling financial decisions, control of financial activities in their daily lives, as well as the psychological control of financial resources. Responsible Financial Behavior (RFB) was assessed with five items modified as the scale created by Potrich et al. (2023). These products capture budgeting discipline, saving regularity, prudent spending and overall financial prudence-demeans greatly http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 8 associated with long term financial prosperity. Digital Privacy Concern (DPC) was assessed as four items based on the Internet Users Information Privacy Concerns scale by Malhotra et al. (2004) modified to fit the digital finance settings by Maruping et al. (2023). These products indicate fears that are connected with misuse of data, the absence of confidentiality, unauthorized access, and the vulnerability of cyber security in the course of the digital financial operations. All these tools provide a high level of theoretical congruence, conceptual clarity, and psychometric reliability and, thus, are suitable in analyzing the behavioral results of the digital finance ecosystem in Pakistan. Findings and Analysis Measurement Model Table 01 shows that the reliability and validity of all constructs are satisfactory psychometrics. The item loadings of every item fall between 0.713 and 0.914 which is higher than the recommended 0.70 (Hair et al., 2022) making it a good indicator of the reliability of the indicators. Cronbach alpha values are 0.855-0.898, and Composite Reliability (CR) scores are 0.885-0.922 which are both well above 0.70, which is the standard threshold in the 0.70-1.00 range, and that indicates a high level of internal consistency. AVE of each construct is between 0.635 and 0.706, which is greater than the required minimum of 0.50, and indicates a high degree of convergent validity. These findings indicate that Digital Financial Self-Efficacy, Mobile Banking Quality, Perceived Financial Control, Responsible Financial Behavior, and Digital Privacy Concern have reliable measures and retrieve adequate variance among their items. On the whole, the measurement model meets the major reliability and validity preconditions, which proves its adequacy to further structural analysis of the model. Table # 01 Reliability and Validity Factor Loading alpha CR AVE Digital Financial Self-Efficacy 0.856 0.897 0.635 DFSE1 0.814 DFSE2 0.769 DFSE3 0.810 DFSE4 0.784 DFSE5 0.805 Digital Privacy Concern 0.855 0.885 0.660 DPC1 0.914 DPC2 0.713 DPC3 0.760 DPC4 0.848 Mobile Banking Quality 0.898 0.922 0.663 MBQ1 0.778 MBQ2 0.803 MBQ3 0.837 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 9 MBQ4 0.792 MBQ5 0.841 MBQ6 0.830 Perceived Financial Control 0.861 0.906 0.706 PFC1 0.829 PFC2 0.844 PFC3 0.832 PFC4 0.856 Responsible Financial Behavior 0.884 0.915 0.683 RFB1 0.838 RFB2 0.799 RFB3 0.823 RFB4 0.856 RFB5 0.815 Figure # 02: Measurement Model Discriminant Validity Table 02, which is based on the HTMT, proves strong discriminant validity, with all the values that are significantly lower than the conservative value of 0.85 as Henseler et al. (2015) recommend. The maximum HTMT value (0.590 between DFSE and PFC) is not too high, which proves that constructs are empirically different. These outcomes also confirm that the measurement model has a discriminant adequacy (Hair http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 16 Reference Addai, B., Boateng, H., & Okoe, A. F. (2024). Mobile banking service quality and customer engagement in emerging markets. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 76, 103532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103532 Ahmed, M., & Dissanayake, D. (2024). Digital financial inclusion challenges in South Asia: Evidence from Pakistan. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 42(1), 55–76. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-04-2023-0194 Arora, S., & Rahman, Z. (2023). Emerging trends in digital financial behaviour: A systematic review. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 22(4), 867–885. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2206 Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum. Gomber, P., Kauffman, R. J., Parker, C., & Weber, B. W. (2023). Digital finance transformations: A review and future directions. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 59, 101195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2023.101195 Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Danks, N. (2024). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook. Springer. Hassan, M., Tariq, M., & Janjua, S. (2024). Factors influencing responsible digital finance use among young adults. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 41, 101017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2023.101017 Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 Khalid, R., & Ali, S. (2024). Privacy concerns, cyber-fraud fears and trust in digital banking: Evidence from Pakistan. Computers & Security, 133, 103457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2023.103457 Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15(4), 336–355. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1040.0032 Maruping, L. M., Bala, H., & Venkatesh, V. (2023). Privacy concerns in mobile financial services: A meta-analytic review. MIS Quarterly, 47(2), 567–598. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2023/17382 Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452 Potrich, A. C. G., Vieira, K. M., & Mendes-Da-Silva, W. (2023). Predicting http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Volume 3, Issue 12 (2025) Online ISSN Print ISSN . . 3007-3197 3007-3189 http://amresearchreview.com/index.php/Journal/about Page 17 responsible financial behaviour: The role of financial capability and behavioural traits. Journal of Economic Psychology, 99, 102644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2023.102644 Ryu, H., Lee, J., & Kim, Y. (2024). Digital financial self-efficacy and mobile banking adoption: A cross-cultural investigation. Information & Management, 61(2), 103780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2023.103780 Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Becker, J. M., & Ringle, C. M. (2022). How to specify, estimate, and validate higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM. Australasian Marketing Journal, 30(4), 423–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2022.01.002 Shim, S., Xiao, J. J., Barber, B., & Lyons, A. (2010). Pathways to life success: Financial capability as a mediator of financial socialization and financial wellbeing. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(12), 1489–1500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9432-x State Bank of Pakistan. (2023). Annual Payment Systems Review. SBP Publications. Yusuf, S., & Mohd-Satar, M. (2023). The influence of digital financial self-efficacy on FinTech usage among millennials. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 28(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41264-022-00160-7 Zestcott, C. A., Rodriguez, L., & Viale, A. (2023). Perceived financial control and financial well-being: A psychological perspective. Journal of Economic Psychology, 98, 102631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2023.102631 Zestcott, C. A., Rodriguez, L., & Viale, A. (2023). Perceived financial control and financial well-being: A psychological perspective. Journal of Economic Psychology, 98, 102631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2023.102631