“Is Sharing Really Caring?”: The Role of Environmental Concern and Trust Reflecting Usage Intention of “Station-Based” and “Free-Floating”—Carsharing Business Models

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

Paper is very well organized, structured and it gives a great insight into the researched topic.

I don't have any significant comments regarding the paper and research, maybe to state that the limitation is that you have researched only one country and that it may be different finding is the research looked other countries as well.

This can represent also potential for new research as well.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article concerns the current and important problem related to the factors determining the intention to use free-floating in comparison to station-based carsharing. However, some of the comments written below may help to improve its readability and clarity.
The style used in the abstract is a bit too informal, while the Authors should use a more impersonal register. Adjectives revealing emotions or personal approach (e.g. ‘tremendous’) to a given topic shall not be used in academic papers. 
Too personal style, the pronoun ‘we’ or ‘our’ should be avoided in academic writing.
The text contains plenty of punctuation mistakes, including a gross overuse of inverted commas (e.g. “sharing economy”). Moreover, when citing a proper name or title, one shall use a single inverted comma, not a double one. 
The Authors must revise the text in order to correct the grammar mistakes (e.g. tenses) and spelling of terminology used (e.g. ‘car sharing’ vs. ‘carsharing’).
Due to long paragraphs, the text is very user-unfriendly. 
Research question RQ2 is not a grammatically correct sentence – if it is to be a question, it must use specific word order and structure, including an auxiliary verb. 
There is no indication of the sources of the inserted objects. Therefore, all sources used to create the figures must be cited, including the following pattern ‘Source: own study based on ...’. If these figures are the result of own research only, this must also be noted accordingly, e.g. ‘Source: own study’.
It is necessary to give each section its proper number.
Authors of this article, who analyze the determinants of the intention to use car-sharing, considering the specific contexts of various free-floating business models, should consider the achievements of other authors related to the intention to re-use free-floating car-sharing research.
The final part of the paper shall be divided into two independent sections, namely ‘Discussion’ and ‘Conclusions’ to make the whole message more transparent for future readers. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments for authors in attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf