Toward a Chatbot for Financial Sustainability

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic of using chatbots to alter behavior of people received more attention in the past two years, and I believe that the authors have conducted a very interesting and relevant study, both for the aims/scope of the journal and for the research/practice oriented scholars. Therefore, my points should only be there for improving the existing approach and should be interpreted in a constructive way.

First of all, some important literature is missing. For instance, I see the relevance of using a chatbot for pro-sustainability behavior (cf. Integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.01.002 ) in the framework. I think that this (or similar) approaches can be used to justify the relevance.

Second, and more important, the paper lacks a discussion section as the results are followed by an immediate conclusion. YOu need to discuss the relevance of your results, in particular, which research gaps you closed and how are you placing the relevance of your research in a broader perspective. I think here also some previously published papers from Sustainability can be relevant for your purposes ( cf. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125119 , https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030860 ,  https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010256 ). In particular, I think that placing these results in the digitalization phenomenon and with specific attention to chatbots can increase the impact and relevance of the article.

Good luck!

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors of Towards a Chatbot for Financial Sustainability present a relevant topic on the efficiency of technology, namely artificial intelligence (AI) applied in the financial sector. Furthermore, we appreciate that the authors of the research also address the issues related to the resistance of the financial industry to the technology applied to the financial sector in terms of its adaptability and efficiency. The concepts, bibliographic sources and citations are adequately mentioned in the paper, especially since in the literature most early versions of chatbots in financial institutions were developed on the basis of rules [16]. The research methodology is appropriate, respectively the authors of the research document the research based on samples, respectively data collection and analysis ”about products from a large Korean banking company to determine the impact of customer purchases of products and services on bank profits (increasing profitability ) on the basis of two channels using ARS ”. Moreover, the authors of the research develop models of technology acceptance (TAM), an aspect that directly supports the research results.

The results are presented appropriately, more precisely the research authors indicate that "new product-oriented funds or housing subscription savings are more suitable for purchase through customer service than through chatbots". Moreover, based on the working hypotheses, the authors of the research have, despite the different academic meanings, practical contributions for the financial sector, but there are problems and limitations of this study, limitations that are presented by the authors of the research.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The version the authors provided seems to tackle the problems of the past version of the paper. I believe that the paper is not only suitable for publication but can also create a sharp impact on the AI-sustainability-finance nexus.