Pricing Decisions in Closed-Loop Supply Chains with Peer-Induced Fairness Concerns
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I think that to improve the paper authors have to do following things:
1. Generalizations, e.g. "Many studies have been conducted on this topic." "The research is generally done based on a large quantity of references"
2. Try to redefine the structure of your paper with respect to results and conclusions importance.
3. Introduction is too long.
4. Define and discuss the research gap.
5. Define the main goal of paper.
6. The contribution of the paper is not clear, thus, the authors shall to clarify the contribution in the introduction. What the novelty of your work compared to other published papers?
7. The research methodology is not clear. Detailed discussion of the study is proposed.
8. Analysis and Results is too short and not clear.
9. Please make sure your conclusions' section undersc ore the scientific value added of your paper. Conclusion should include the answer to the research question posed and further directions of research.
10. References - repetition: Du, S, F; Nie, T, F; Chu, C, B; Yu, Y, G. Reciprocal supply chain with intention. European Journal of Operational Research. 2014, 239, 389-402.
11. The cited literature is quite old.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper "Pricing Decisions in Closed-loop Supply Chains with Peer-induced Fairness Concerns" analyzes the influence of fairness concerned behaviours on decisions in a CLSP.
It provides a proper state of the art review, and is of interest for the readers of Sustainability.
Several comments to improve it:
- Abstract should be rewritten. Please follow the Instruction for authors: "The abstract should be a total of about 200 words maximum. The abstract should be a single paragraph and should follow the style of structured abstracts, but without headings: 1) Background: Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study; 2) Methods: Describe briefly the main methods or treatments applied. Include any relevant preregistration numbers, and species and strains of any animals used. 3) Results: Summarize the article's main findings; and 4) Conclusion: Indicate the main conclusions or interpretations. The abstract should be an objective representation of the article: it must not contain results which are not presented and substantiated in the main text and should not exaggerate the main conclusions."
- Line 62: Define P&G
-Line 180: Coordination
-Line 198: Therefore, the paper
-Section 3 and 4: Please, use proper format for the equations. Follow the template and number the equations, as it makes it easier for the reader.
-Some of the theorems and corollaries could be provided as supplementary material to make the paper shorter.
-Figures are too small and the text difficult to read.
- Please,clearly state and elaborate regarding the paper limitations
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I accept
Author Response
please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper has been significantly improved, however, several changes should still be made:
Abstract could still be improved to include : Background Methods Results Conclusions Equations should be cited in the text, and cited as equations, not as formulas Figure must be improved to enhance readability. Text is still too smallI am not a native speaker, but the English grammar and style of several phrases should be checked.
Author Response
please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
