Investigating Accessibility of Social Security System (SSS) Mobile Application: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper entitled " Investigating accessibility of Social Security System (SSS) mobile application; Integration of extended technology acceptance model and theory of planned behavior" is well written and well structured. 

The author provided the benefits of using e-transaction through the social security system (SSS) in Philipins which was launched in 2018 and provided a theoretical framework on how to improve its service by awareness. The system was used by over 85,000 274 daily transactions in which were downloaded by millions in different application stores. Although it is not clear how it can implement in other developing countries for example. It will be great if the researcher provides such a comparison. 

Author Response

Good day!

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your time reviewing our paper and for giving valuable comments and suggestions for improving our paper.
Please see the attachment for our feedback/s on your comment/s and suggestion/s.

Regards,
Klint Allen Mariñas

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The first of all title must be improved - it is unclear and unusual instead of clear and as short as possible. Also, English editing is a must - sometimes it is not easy to understand what authors intended to say. Introduction should introduce the topic and its importance - give reasons why this research is needed and explain how the paper structure will solve research gap. Also, explain better how hypothesis are posted and on the bases of which references. Give sample characteristics, please, too - more info about participants is necessary. My advice before SEM is to apply reliability tests (Cronbach Alpha for instance) and factor analysis and even better model will be obtained - this models suffers in demography construct. Also, discussion is needed - compare your results with already available.

Author Response

Good day!

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your time reviewing our paper and for giving valuable comments and suggestions for improving our paper.
Please see the attachment for our feedback/s on your comment/s and suggestion/s.

Regards,
Klint Allen Mariñas

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 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.
In the assessment of the paper submitted for the review, I specifically focussed on the discussed issues, applied research methods and the scope of analysis of research results, as well as substantive content of the article and its structure. The manuscript is interesting and original. It deals with an interesting topic which is currently of interest among researchers. 

To improve the quality of the work I would recommend:

1.Identify the relevance of the research topic "social security system" to sustainability or the journal. Contributions to the journal must be mentioned.

2.The description and explanation of social security system APP need to be strengthened. Interface, operation, etc. Some pictures are needed.

3.Despite the use of PLS, which requires a small number of samples, with such a large number of variables in this study (60 questions), two hundred samples may not be enough to have statistical reliability. I think the subject of this study is very easy to find more samples.

4.As with the previous point, the author must state the representativeness of the sample. And more description of the samples.

5.The Discussion section must be supplemented.

6.The authors must explain the contribution of the article at the end.

Author Response

Good day!

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your time reviewing our paper and for giving valuable comments and suggestions for improving our paper.
Please see the attachment for our feedback/s on your comment/s and suggestion/s.

Regards,
Klint Allen Mariñas

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Paper is appropriate now. 

Reviewer 3 Report

I think the authors answered my question.