Applied Big Data Analysis to Build Customer Product Recommendation Model

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have tried to bring a serious work with this paper. There are a few imperfections those must be improved:

In the introduction, originality must be justified in the context of previous studies. The author should update the manuscript with appropriate and relevant research questions. The importance of research does not arise. Discussion and conclusions have been expanded. Results presentation section seems to be general. Further, what is the major contribution of this study? Try to illustrate them in the manuscript. The conclusions must be improved, clearly indicating the main conclusion, and relating it to the literature supporting the paper ("according to (...), or" unlike (...) "). Also, conclusions should be rewritten to understand the importance of research. Are there any further research streams?

Author Response

I finish amend my manuscript for my best. And upload it Today.
Because I will leave academia and back to the enterprise at May 2021. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Many thanks!
Best regards,
Chuang Wei Wei

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

When reviewing scientific papers for publication, I usually start with a general overview in terms of a structure, abstract, literature review, methodology, findings of the research, discussion, conclusions, as well as limitations of the study and future directions of the research. I also pay attention to the language level, especially if the paper is written in English, and English is not the native language. 

The topic (Applied Big Data Analysis to Build Customer Product Recom mendation Model) can be considered as actual and valuable from the point of view of further research in the area. The main problem with the paper is that its structure is inappropriate; though it includes most of the parts that should be presented in the scientific paper, the very important section "Discussion" doesn't actually exist. The paper should follow the IMRAD structure, i.e. Introduction – Literature review – Methods – Results – Discussion and – Conclusions. Discussion section should discuss the results achieved; In addition, there should be references to the results of other scholars.

The proportions of this article are inappropriate:

Introduction - less than two pages

Materials and Methods - twenty pages! There is no justification for such an extensive section on Materials and Methods. This is more like a statistical exercise carried out by students than a scientific article.

Results - eleven pages.

Discussion - only half a page!

Conslusions - half a page. The article should also indicate the limitations of the study.

Another important problem with the paper is that we do not have hypotheses in this paper. In "Introduction" section there are indicated only very generally research gap. We do not have research questions and hypotheses. Please note that research hypotheses should be formulated in accordance to the following rules: 1) if…. then, or 2) ‘x phenomenon has a positive/negative impact on Y phenomenon. In this case there are just some sentences taken from the literature.

The article also did not provide specific information on how the research sample was selected. This is very important because the statistical analysis is carried out if the research sample was representative and was selected at random.

The literature review is good (70 literature items) and is founded in the existing literature of the topic. Generally I claim that Author (s) provide solid theoretical foundations for the analysis using appropriate references. I would, however, recommend to add new references to “Discussion” section devoted to the latest literature associated with the topic in question (including Web of Science and Scopus papers).

I also recommend a final proofreading of the paper to be done by the native speaker. 

Author Response

I finish amend my manuscript for my best. And upload it Today.
Because I will leave academia and back to the enterprise at May 2021. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Many thanks!
Best regards,
Chuang Wei Wei

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors, my congratulations for the work presented, which reveals some merits but also contains serious flaws that I point out in my review that I send in an attached document. If you have the opportunity to review it, I hope you can take my suggestions for improvement into account. Good luck.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

I finish amend my manuscript for my best. And upload it Today.
Because I will leave academia and back to the enterprise at May 2021. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Many thanks!
Best regards,
Chuang Wei Wei

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have addressed the most of concerns and the current version is acceptable.

Author Response

I added reference papers that I recently read.

5.Conclusions

[73] Customer lifetime value (CLV) measurement is challenging as it requires forecasting customers' future purchases. [74]The same treatment of all customers will cause customers who are not so valuable will be value destroyer rather than a value creator. Giving discounts and promos to all customers has not provided benefits to a company in retaining customers. Thus, [75] Leading multinationals such as Alibaba, Lenovo, LG Corporation, Mitsubishi, Nestlé, Tata Motors and Tesco use customer value strategies to build rational and emotional bonds with their target markets.

Reviewer 2 Report

The article has been corrected and supplemented and, in my opinion, may be published.

Author Response

I added reference papers that I recently read.

5.Conclusions

[73] Customer lifetime value (CLV) measurement is challenging as it requires forecasting customers' future purchases. [74]The same treatment of all customers will cause customers who are not so valuable will be value destroyer rather than a value creator. Giving discounts and promos to all customers has not provided benefits to a company in retaining customers. Thus, [75] Leading multinationals such as Alibaba, Lenovo, LG Corporation, Mitsubishi, Nestlé, Tata Motors and Tesco use customer value strategies to build rational and emotional bonds with their target markets.

Reviewer 3 Report

Congratulations for the qualitative increase that you give to the article presented.

I appreciate the fact that you have considered my suggestions for revision and the justifications you have given are acceptable. The literature review can be improved, updated and with this, the discussion of results can benefit. So, if you have the opportunity to review the work, in my opinion, this is the main aspect to which you should pay attention. Congratulations and good luck.

Author Response

I added reference papers that I recently read.

5.Conclusions

[73] Customer lifetime value (CLV) measurement is challenging as it requires forecasting customers' future purchases. [74]The same treatment of all customers will cause customers who are not so valuable will be value destroyer rather than a value creator. Giving discounts and promos to all customers has not provided benefits to a company in retaining customers. Thus, [75] Leading multinationals such as Alibaba, Lenovo, LG Corporation, Mitsubishi, Nestlé, Tata Motors and Tesco use customer value strategies to build rational and emotional bonds with their target markets.