Travelers’ Perceived Value of Robot Services in the Airline Industry: Focusing on Demographic Characteristics

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is an interesting and a new research topic. Congratulations to authors for researching on an important and current topic. With future tourism industry depending much on technology and digitalization, study on the feasibility and acceptance of robot services is indeed significant. 

Unfortunately, there was not much information about service robots were explained in the introduction. There were only two sentences where authors mentioned “The role of robots in the airline industry has recently been attracting attention” and “. Airports have recently introduced service robots to solve 37 this problem” Authors need to quote some of the service robots that had been introduced in certain airports, their roles, etc. I am sure there are some data or reports that measure the performance of effectiveness of such service. Also explain how the service robots has taken over the traditional role of human service at airports. Have this been efficient so far? 

Authors mentioned that “about perceived value based on robots in the airport industry is 45 very limited.” So, what was the studies on the subject matter? Which area did they investigate? There must be evidence to substantiate such statement.

Authors further mentioned that “the previous studies investigated perceived value in diverse industries”. What previous studies? Which diverse industries? Literature must be provided to support this statement and to support the gap authors are trying to investigate.

Is perceived value referred to benefits or perceived / expected benefits? I would think the latter. Please kindly relook on the definition of the perceived value. 

This is the third time that I noted statement was not substantiated. Authors mentioned that “Various research suggested a multidimensional construct of perceived value for this reason in order to identify consumer behavior”. Which research? How many? Which area? What is multidimensional construct? Why do utilitarian value and the hedonic value been categories as multidimensional construct? It is not clear in the paragraph that began at number 81 to 91, on how the two values behave or measured to explain perceived value. When explanations are too brief, often, a lot of information is missing. Authors need to elaborate all points (as per my earlier comments too) to enhance reader’s understanding of the subject matter.

The empirical evidence write up is too short that I could not deduce a clear understanding on the effects of sociodemographic variables. Only four (4) studies were quoted as empirical evidence. This is inadequate!

The placing and explanation of the hypothesis were not strongly supported and seem to be out of place – hanging without proper explanation.

“The measurement scales from the previous studies were applied in order to prepare 133 the questionnaire”. What were the scales? These need to be explained and elaborated. The methodology for the objectives were not clearly explained. Kindly elaborate how the variables are measured, especially on the utilitarian and hedonic values. Simply stating that they were measured based on 7-Likert scale was insufficient. Kindly also elaborate on the regression method adopted in the analysis. 

Since the survey was done at Incheon Airport, it is also worth to explain to the readers what type of robot service was available at Incheon Airport. I don’t recall seeing robot service at the airport. But perhaps I was not paying much attention to such service. Would appreciate if authors could explain this in the paper. 

Kindly separate discussion and implications. Implications should be at the conclusion. I don’t think this paper contribute to theory but empirical evidence yes. What theory was modified or emerged as a result of the study?  Discussion should follow objectives not implications. Kindly amend. 

Why do authors claim that the study does not need Institutional Review Board Statement? This study involves survey and human subject. These are basic requirement for ethics. Kindly provide explanation on this. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Summary of Revisions for the Sustainability Manuscript #2063187

A study on the perceived value of travelers for robot service in the airline industry: Focusing on demographic characteristics

We sincerely appreciate the reviewers’ comments and suggestions on the previous version of this manuscript. We have thoroughly studied all of them and have revised the manuscript accordingly. This report summarizes our responses to all the comments, which are in red for your convenience.

___________________________________________________________________________

Reviewer 1:

1. This is an interesting and a new research topic. Congratulations to authors for researching on an important and current topic. With future tourism industry depending much on technology and digitalization, study on the feasibility and acceptance of robot services is indeed significant.

Response: Thank you so much for your encouragement.

2. Unfortunately, there was not much information about service robots were explained in the introduction. There were only two sentences where authors mentioned “The role of robots in the airline industry has recently been attracting attention” and “. Airports have recently introduced service robots to solve 37 this problem” Authors need to quote some of the service robots that had been introduced in certain airports, their roles, etc. I am sure there are some data or reports that measure the performance of effectiveness of such service. Also explain how the service robots has taken over the traditional role of human service at airports. Have this been efficient so far?

Response: Thank you for your keen observation. We added the following excerpt to explain the role of airport service robots.

☞ Service robots can be found in several major airports around the world. For example, in the Frankfurt Airport, self-driven guide robots have been employed [8], and Spencer is an airport service robot that leads passengers to their boarding gate in the Amsterdam Schiphol Airport [9]. A service robot named, Josie Pepper helps passengers in the Munich Airport with shuttle services, shop and restaurant information, as well as answers questions regarding flights [9]. Troika can be found in the Incheon Airport in Seoul escorting passengers to their gates and providing weather information for destination cities [10,11]. In the Mt. Fuji Shizuoka Airport in Japan, Reborg-Z is a robot that provides guiding and security services, and can interpret passengers’ emotions to communicate with them [12]. Robots implemented in the Pittsburgh Airport take on other roles by cleaning the airport’s floors with ultraviolet rays [13]. Overall, airport service robots help guests with shuttle services, provide directions, answer questions, and even help scan boarding passes and luggage tags [14]. Some robots expand the customer service role by taking photos with guests or provide entertainment by singing songs [14]. In general, airport patrons are satisfied with service robot interactions, but in the case of Spencer, passengers were unsatisfied with Spencer’s service failures [12].

[References]

8. Chuah, S.H.W.; Aw, E.C.X.; Yee, D. Unveiling the complexity of consumers’ intention to use service robots: An fsQCA approach. Computers in Human Behavior 2021, 123, 106870.

9. Milman, A.; Tasci, A.; Zhang, T. Perceived robotic server qualities and functions explaining customer loyalty in the theme park context. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 2020, 32, 3895-3923.

10. SCMP.com. Meet Troika, the Chinese-speaking Robot Helping Tourists at a South Korean Airport. 2020. Available online: https: //www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asia/article/2101253/meet-troika-chinese-speaking-robot-helping-tourists-south-korean (accessed on 25 November 2022).

11. Miskolczi, M.; Jászberényi, M.; Tóth, D. Technology-Enhanced Airport Services—Attractiveness from the Travelers’ Perspective. Sustainability 2021, 13, 705.

12. Hornyak, T. Meet the robots that may be coming to an airport near you. CNBC. Available online: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/10/meet-the-robots-that-may-be-coming-to-an-airport-near-you.html (accessed on 25 November 2022).

13. Sreenath, S.; Sudhakar, K.; Yusop, A.F. Sustainability at airports: Technologies and best practices from ASEAN countries. Journal of Environmental Management 2021, 299, 113639.

14. Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I.; Yildiz, B.; Cigdem, S.; Cincikaite, R. The effect of COVID-19 on airline transportation services: A study on service robot usage intention. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12571.

3. Authors mentioned that “about perceived value based on robots in the airport industry is 45 very limited.” So, what was the studies on the subject matter? Which area did they investigate? There must be evidence to substantiate such statement. Authors further mentioned that “the previous studies investigated perceived value in diverse industries”. What previous studies? Which diverse industries? Literature must be provided to support this statement and to support the gap authors are trying to investigate.

Response: Thank you for your detailed review. Based on your suggestion we added prior studies relative to perceived value.

☞ For example, Ryu et al. [22] confirmed the positive effect of perceived value in the quick-casual restaurant industry. Ozturk et al. [23] assessed utilitarian and hedonic value in mobile hotel booking technology and found that both utilitarian and hedonic value had a significantly positive effect on continued use. In the context of Airbnb, hedonic and utilitarian value was positively correlated with customer satisfaction [24]. Teng and Wu [25] discovered utilitarian and hedonic values positively impacted pref-erence in the green restaurant field. Lastly, perceived utilitarian and hedonic value had a positive effect on purchase intention regarding AI technology for online shop-ping platforms [26].

[References]

22. Ryu; K., Han, H.; Kim, T.H. The relationships among overall quick-casual restaurant image, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions. International Journal of Hospitality Management 2008, 27, 459-469.

23. Ozturk, A.B.; Nusair, K.; Okumus, F.; Hua, N. The role of utilitarian and hedonic values on users’ continued usage intention in a mobile hotel booking environment. International Journal of Hospitality Management 2016, 57, 106-115.

24. Lee, S.; Kim, D.Y. The effect of hedonic and utilitarian values on satisfaction and loyalty of Airbnb users. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 2018, 30, 1332-1351.

25. Teng, Y.M.; Wu, K.S. Sustainability development in hospitality: The effect of perceived value on customers’ green restaurant behavioral intention. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1987.

26. Yin, J.; Qiu, X. AI technology and online purchase intention: Structural equation model based on perceived value. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5671.

4. Is perceived value referred to benefits or perceived / expected benefits? I would think the latter. Please kindly relook on the definition of the perceived value.

Response: Thank you for your careful observation. In our paper, we used the most widely acknowledged definition of perceived value. In this definition, perceived value refers to the perceptions of what is received (benefits) assessed against the cost.

☞The definition of perceived value that is the most acknowledged definition is “the consumer’s overall assessment of the utility of a product based on perceptions of what is received and what is given” [19] (p. 14).

[References]

19. Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing 1988, 52, 2-22.

5. This is the third time that I noted statement was not substantiated. Authors mentioned that “Various research suggested a multidimensional construct of perceived value for this reason in order to identify consumer behavior”. Which research? How many? Which area? What is multidimensional construct? Why do utilitarian value and the hedonic value been categories as multidimensional construct? It is not clear in the paragraph that began at number 81 to 91, on how the two values behave or measured to explain perceived value. When explanations are too brief, often, a lot of information is missing. Authors need to elaborate all points (as per my earlier comments too) to enhance reader’s understanding of the subject matter.

Response: Thank you for your precise observation. We added the following to better define the multidimensional aspect of perceived value.

☞ For instance, Mattsson [36] categorized perceived value into five sub-dimensions in-cluding function, social, emotional, epistemic, and conditional. Grewal et al. [37] di-vided perceived value into acquisition value and transaction value. In the study of Sweeney and Soutar [38], perceived value was grouped into four groups: quality, emo-tional, social, and price. In this model, quality, emotional, and social are the benefits, where price is the cost. Sanchez et al. [39] classified perceived value into three sub-groups including functional, emotional, and social. Lee et al. [40] applied emotion-al value, functional value, and overall value to explain tourist satisfaction. There are two dimensions of perceived value among them, which include the utilitarian value and the hedonic value, that were suggested by Babin, Darden, and Griffin [40], which are used the most. Consumer behavior includes both utilitarian and hedonic outputs, however, research into the early 1980s only considered the utilitarian element [41,42]. Hence, Babin et al. [40] created a multidimensional concept of perceived value to in-clude utilitarian and hedonic value.

[References]

36. Mattsson, J. Better Business by the Abc of Values, Studdentlitteratur: Lund, Sweden, 1991.

37. Grewal, D.; Monroe, K.B.; Krishnan, R. The effects of price-comparison advertising on buyers’ perceptions of acquisition value, transaction value, and behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing 1998, 62, 46–59.

38. Sweeney, J.C.; Soutar, G.N. Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing 2001, 77, 203-220.

39. Sanchez, J.; Callarisa, L.; Rodriguez, R.M.; Moliner, M.A. Perceived value of the purchase of a tourism product. Tourism Management 2006, 27, 394-409.

40. Lee, C.K.; Yoon, Y.S.; Lee, S.K. Investigating the relationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and recommendations: The case of the Korean DMZ. Tourism Management 2007, 28, 204-214.

41. Babin, B.J.; Darden, W.R.; Griffin, M. Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research 1994, 20, 644-656.

42. Holbrook, M.B.; Hirschman, E.C. The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings, and Fun. Journal of Consumer Research 1982, 9, 132–140

43. Sánchez-Fernández, R.; Iniesta-Bonillo, M.Á. The concept of perceived value: a systematic review of the research. Marketing Theory 2007, 7, 427-451.

6. The empirical evidence write up is too short that I could not deduce a clear understanding on the effects of sociodemographic variables. Only four (4) studies were quoted as empirical evidence. This is inadequate!

Response: Thank you for this valuable comment. Following the reviewer’s comment, we tried to add empirical studies related to the importance of sociodemographic variables.

☞ In addition, Yarimoglu [53] investigated demographic differences on service quality and perceived value in private online shopping clubs, they proved that significant dif-ferences were found in regards to the age. Ahn [54] also studied effectiveness of de-mographic characteristics in understanding Malaysian customers’ perceived value of the integrated resort sector. The results of the data analysis revealed that there were statistically significant differences in terms of gender and marital status. Zhao et al. [55] also proved demographic differences on tourists’ perceived value, they found that significant differences were found in regards to the gender. They justified their study based on the stratification theory [56], it refers to the differences between social mem-bers and groups that arise due to an individual's social resources and characteristics. Based on these empirical evidence and theory, it can be inferred that there are signifi-cant differences in the perceived values according to travelers' demographic charac-teristics. As a result, the following hypotheses are postulated.

[References]

53. Yarimoglu, E.K. Demographic differences on service quality and perceived value in private online shopping clubs. Journal of Strategic Marketing 2017, 25, 240-257.

54. Ahn, J. Effectiveness of demographic characteristics in understanding Malaysian customers’ perceived value of the integrated resort sector. Journal of Vacation Marketing 2020, 26, 195-210.

55. Zhao, Y.; Chau, K.Y.; Shen, H.; Duan, X.; Huang, S. The influence of tourists’ perceived value and demographic characteristics on the homestay industry: A study based on social stratification theory. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 2020, 45, 479-485.

56. Grusky, D. Social stratification, class, race, and gender in sociological perspective. Routledge: England, United Kingdom, 2019.

7. The placing and explanation of the hypothesis were not strongly supported and seem to be out of place – hanging without proper explanation.

Response: Thank you for this important comment, and as you suggested, we added prior studies in order to support our hypotheses.

☞ Consumers are more likely to have a high level of intentions to use a certain prod-uct/service, which is based on a favorable evaluation of the product/service [58]. For instance, Pandža Bajs [59] found that perceived value of tourist destination had posi-tive effect on intentions to visit in the future. Gan and Wang [60] discovered that per-ceived value of social commerce positively affects intentions to use. There is also suffi-cient evidence of the effect of perceived values on intentions to use in the context of technology [61,62].

[References]

59. Pandža Bajs, I. Tourist perceived value, relationship to satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: The example of the Croatian tourist destination Dubrovnik. Journal of Travel Research 2015, 54, 122-134.

60. Gan, C.; Wang, W. The influence of perceived value on purchase intention in social commerce context. Internet Research 2017, 27, 772-785.

61. Ozturk, A.B.; Nusair, K.; Okumus, F.; Hua, N. The role of utilitarian and hedonic values on users’ continued usage intention in a mobile hotel booking environment. International Journal of Hospitality Management 2016, 57, 106-115.

62. Ashraf, R.U.; Hou, F.; Ahmad, W. Understanding continuance intention to use social media in China: The roles of personality drivers, hedonic value, and utilitarian value. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 2019, 35, 1216-1228.

8. “The measurement scales from the previous studies were applied in order to prepare the questionnaire”. What were the scales? These need to be explained and elaborated. The methodology for the objectives were not clearly explained. Kindly elaborate how the variables are measured, especially on the utilitarian and hedonic values. Simply stating that they were measured based on 7-Likert scale was insufficient. Kindly also elaborate on the regression method adopted in the analysis.

Response: Thank you for this comment. We additionally wrote the details of the measurement items and analysis methods below.

☞ 3.1. Measurement and analysis

This study constructed measurement items based on previous studies to test the proposed hypotheses [58,61-63]. First, utilitarian values were measured with three items about whether the robot service is useful, practical, or convenient. Second, hedonic values were measured by three items about whether the experience using robot service was happy, joyful, or pleasing. Third, intentions to use were measured by three items about whether willing to use an airport in the future, likely to use an airport later, and continue to use an airport. All 9 items were measured using a Likert’s scale, which ranged from (1) strongly disagree to (7) strongly agree. Lastly, demographic characteristics such as gender, age, education level, marital status, and monthly income were constructed in the questionnaire.

In addition, in order to test the reliability of the measurement items, this study performed a pre-test survey based on 30 actual tourists using online surveys. As a result, there was no problem with the questionnaire.

The study used the SPSS statistical program as an analysis tool. First, the collected responses were conducted data cleaning, and frequency analysis was conducted in order to identify the characteristics of the sample. Prior to hypothesis testing, principal component analysis was conducted to verify the reliability and validity of the constructs. The study conducted t-test (gender) and one-way ANOVA (age, education, marital status, and monthly income) to test differences according to demographic characteristics. Lastly, multiple regression analysis was performed to test the hypotheses on causal relationships: (1) the effect of utilitarian value on intentions to use and (2) the effect of hedonic value on intentions to use.

[References]

58. Hwang, J.; Kim, J.J.; Lee, K.W. Investigating consumer innovativeness in the context of drone food delivery services: Its impact on attitude and behavioral intentions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2021, 163, 120433.

61. Ozturk, A.B.; Nusair, K.; Okumus, F.; Hua, N. The role of utilitarian and hedonic values on users’ continued usage intention in a mobile hotel booking environment. International Journal of Hospitality Management 2016, 57, 106-115.

62. Ashraf, R.U.; Hou, F.; Ahmad, W. Understanding continuance intention to use social media in China: The roles of personality drivers, hedonic value, and utilitarian value. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 2019, 35, 1216-1228.

63. Zeithaml, V.A.; Berry, L.L.; Parasuraman, A. The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing 1996, 60, 31-46.

9. Since the survey was done at Incheon Airport, it is also worth to explain to the readers what type of robot service was available at Incheon Airport. I don’t recall seeing robot service at the airport. But perhaps I was not paying much attention to such service. Would appreciate if authors could explain this in the paper.

Response: Thank you for pointing this detail out. We included an explanation of the type of robot services provided at Incheon Airport.

☞ [In Introduction Section]

“Troika” can be found in the Incheon Airport in Seoul escorting passengers to their gates and providing weather information for destination cities [10,11]

☞ [In Data Collection Section]

Troika refers to the name of the service robot employed in Incheon Airport [11]. The service robots at Incheon Airport are self-driven robots who guide passengers to their departing gates or other locations within the airport, scan boarding passes to provide flight information, provide weather information, and can answer questions in four different languages including English, Korean, Chinese, and Japanese [10,65].

[References]

10. SCMP.com. Meet Troika, the Chinese-speaking Robot Helping Tourists at a South Korean Airport. 2020. Available online: https: //www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asia/article/2101253/meet-troika-chinese-speaking-robot-helping-tourists-south-korean (accessed on 25 November 2022).

11. Miskolczi, M.; Jászberényi, M.; Tóth, D. Technology-Enhanced Airport Services—Attractiveness from the Travelers’ Perspective. Sustainability 2021, 13, 705.

65. Lo, A. Will robots take over our airports?, Available online: https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/robots-in-airports/index.html (accessed on 25 November 2022).

10. Kindly separate discussion and implications. Implications should be at the conclusion. I don’t think this paper contribute to theory but empirical evidence yes. What theory was modified or emerged as a result of the study? Discussion should follow objectives not implications. Kindly amend.

Response: Thank you for this important comment. As you mentioned, we have highlighted what theory was modified or emerged as a result of the study. In particular, this study presents differentiated results from studies in the foodservice context, where research on new technology-based services is actively conducted.

☞ Previous studies emphasized the differences in gender in the context of new technology-based services [51,52], but the study discovered that no significant difference in perceived values was found in gender. These previous studies the investigation in foodservice industry, the present study focused on the airline industry. In other words, it suggests that the importance of demographic characteristics can be different depending on the industrial background even for the same technology-based service. As a result, the present study presents the first finding of significant differences in perceived values based on demographic characteristics, which include age, education, and marital status.

☞ More specifically, the result of this study revealed that the path coefficient of the hedonic value is higher than the utilitarian value. It is a result contrary to a previous study on robot service in restaurants [70]. In the study on unmanned robot coffee shops [71], the hedonic value was not significant, and only the utilitarian value was significant. It is inferred that utilitarian value is important in the context of foodservice where products are provided. More importantly, it suggests that hedonic value is stronger in the context of travel seeking either happiness or well-being. It is the first finding of the causal relationship between perceived values and intentions to use an airport in the context of robot services.

[References]

51. Cho, A.; Hwang, J. Application of Motivated Consumer Innovativeness to the Context of Drone Food Delivery Services: Focusing on the Different Test of Demographic Factors. Journal of MICE & Tourism Research 2021, 21, 7-24.

52. Joo, K.; Hwang, J. A study on the effect of SERVQUAL on word-of-mouth intentions in the context of robotic restaurants: Focusing on demographic properties differences. Culinary Science & Hospitality Research 2022, 28, 12-22.

70. Kwak, M.K.; Lee, J.; Cha, S.S. Senior consumer motivations and perceived value of robot service restaurants in Korea. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2755.

71. Bae, J.H.; Jeon, H.M. Exploring the Relationships among Brand Experience, Perceived Product Quality, Hedonic Value, Utilitarian Value, and Brand Loyalty in Unmanned Coffee Shops during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11713.

11. Why do authors claim that the study does not need Institutional Review Board Statement? This study involves survey and human subject. These are basic requirement for ethics. Kindly provide explanation on this.

Response: Thank you for kind suggestion. Ethical review and approval were waived for this study, due to the confirmation of IRB exemption accroding to the Enforcement Rules 13 of Act 16 of the Bioethics in Korea. Our research team has published more than 30 papers in the Journal of Sustainability, and we have never submitted IRB-related documents to a journal. In particular, we made it clear that this study conducted a survey that did not require an IRB.

In addition, the editor said that "The editorial office accepted your waiver explanation but we still need your blank informed consent form", and we completed sending the form.

Again, we appreciate your positive assessment about our paper. Your comments and suggestions definitely have improved the quality of this manuscript.

_____________________________________________________________________

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments to the Author
I found this paper well written after a careful review of the manuscript. So, I want to suggest a few minor issues for further improvement.

1.     The purpose of the research is presented succinctly in the introduction. However, it would be even better if the purpose is a bit more fleshed out.

2.     Overall, the theoretical background needs to be enhanced; and the research topic about the robot service could be better linked with the trends of tourism & hospitality and airline industries in the post-pandemic era, which indicates that how the robot service can be tightly involved the pro-social travel environment, creative image, CSR, as well as the perceived value/ perceived quality of a trip in the pandemic period.

This paper can be further enriched by citing more related previous research. Below are some of the papers authors consider to improve the quality of paper.  

Chi, X., Meng, B., Zhou, H., & Han, H. (2022). Cultivating and disseminating a festival image: the case of the Qingdao International Beer Festival. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 39(4), 373-393.

Han, H., Chi, X., Kim, C. S., & Ryu, H. B. (2020). Activators of airline customers’ sense of moral obligation to engage in pro-social behaviors: Impact of CSR in the Korean marketplace. Sustainability, 12(10), 4334.

Chi, X., Han, H., & Kim, S. (2022). Protecting yourself and others: festival tourists’ pro-social intentions for wearing a mask, maintaining social distancing, and practicing sanitary/hygiene actions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 30(8), 1915-1936.

Chi, X., Lee, S. K., Ahn, Y. J., & Kiatkawsin, K. (2020). Tourist-perceived quality and loyalty intentions towards rural tourism in China. Sustainability, 12(9), 3614.

Han, H., Al-Ansi, A., Chi, X., Baek, H., & Lee, K. S. (2020). Impact of environmental CSR, service quality, emotional, and price perception on word-of-mouth for full-service airlines. Sustainability, 12(10), 3974.

3.     Did you conduct a pre-test? If so, please clarify which part of the pre-test was improved. If not, why not? More details about data collection could be provided.

4.     The results of this study, as presented in the conclusion, are very short and lack depth. Therefore, detailed explanations on the results presented are needed, and more past studies need to be presented.

Your research is meaningful and much appreciated.

Good luck

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Summary of Revisions for the Sustainability Manuscript #2063187

A study on the perceived value of travelers for robot service in the airline industry: Focusing on demographic characteristics

We sincerely appreciate the reviewers’ comments and suggestions on the previous version of this manuscript. We have thoroughly studied all of them and have revised the manuscript accordingly. This report summarizes our responses to all the comments, which are in red for your convenience.

___________________________________________________________________________

Reviewer:

I found this paper well written after a careful review of the manuscript. So, I want to suggest a few minor issues for further improvement.

Response: Thank you for this encouragement and for all of your comments. Our responses to your comments are summarized in the following section.

1. The purpose of the research is presented succinctly in the introduction. However, it would be even better if the purpose is a bit more fleshed out.

Response: Thank you for this important comment. As you suggested, we rewrote the purpose of study in the introduction section as follows:

☞ In summary, recently, the importance of robot service in airports has been emphasized, but there is no research related to it. More importantly, the previous studies investigated perceived value in diverse industries, but it is necessary to extend the importance of perceived value to service robots in the airline industry. To overcome this gap, the purposes of the current study were to explore the differences of perceived value based the demographic characteristics, such as gender, age, education level, marital status, and monthly income. Additionally, this paper investigated the effects of perceived value on intentions to use. The results of this study are considered to be helpful in regards to developing marketing strategies for introducing service robots in the airline industry.

2. Overall, the theoretical background needs to be enhanced; and the research topic about the robot service could be better linked with the trends of tourism & hospitality and airline industries in the post-pandemic era, which indicates that how the robot service can be tightly involved the pro-social travel environment, creative image, CSR, as well as the perceived value/ perceived quality of a trip in the pandemic period.

This paper can be further enriched by citing more related previous research. Below are some of the papers authors consider to improve the quality of paper. 

Chi, X., Meng, B., Zhou, H., & Han, H. (2022). Cultivating and disseminating a festival image: the case of the Qingdao International Beer Festival. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 39(4), 373-393.

Han, H., Chi, X., Kim, C. S., & Ryu, H. B. (2020). Activators of airline customers’ sense of moral obligation to engage in pro-social behaviors: Impact of CSR in the Korean marketplace. Sustainability, 12(10), 4334.

Chi, X., Han, H., & Kim, S. (2022). Protecting yourself and others: festival tourists’ pro-social intentions for wearing a mask, maintaining social distancing, and practicing sanitary/hygiene actions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 30(8), 1915-1936.

Chi, X., Lee, S. K., Ahn, Y. J., & Kiatkawsin, K. (2020). Tourist-perceived quality and loyalty intentions towards rural tourism in China. Sustainability, 12(9), 3614.

Han, H., Al-Ansi, A., Chi, X., Baek, H., & Lee, K. S. (2020). Impact of environmental CSR, service quality, emotional, and price perception on word-of-mouth for full-service airlines. Sustainability, 12(10), 3974.

Response: Thank you for this comment, and we added the papers you suggested in the revised manuscript.

☞ Second, people are more likely to use non-face-to-face services after COVID-19 because of risk of infection [4,5], so they prefer to find robots in the service industry.

☞ The previous studies before COVID-19 focused on social responsibilities in the airline industry [15,16], the current study tried to apply the concept of perceived value to the service robots in the airline industry.

☞ The concept was measured based on a one-dimensional construct, which tried to understand consumer behavior, when perceived value was first introduced. For example, Chi et al. [34] studied the perceived value of rural tourism, they discovered that the perceived value significantly affects tourist satisfaction.

[References]

4. Chi, X.; Meng, B.; Zhou, H.; Han, H. Cultivating and disseminating a festival image: the case of the Qingdao International Beer Festival. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 2015, 39, 373-393.

5. Chi, X.; Han, H.; Kim, S. Protecting yourself and others: festival tourists’ pro-social intentions for wearing a mask, maintaining social distancing, and practicing sanitary/hygiene actions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 2020, 30, 1915-1936.

15. Han, H.; Al-Ansi, A.; Chi, X.; Baek, H.; Lee, K.S. Impact of environmental CSR, service quality, emotional, and price perception on word-of-mouth for full-service airlines. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3974.

16. Han, H.; Chi, X.; Kim, C.S.; Ryu, H.B. Activators of airline customers’ sense of moral obligation to engage in pro-social behaviors: Impact of CSR in the Korean marketplace. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4334.

34. Chi, X.; Lee, S.K.; Ahn, Y.J.; Kiatkawsin, K. Tourist-perceived quality and loyalty intentions towards rural tourism in China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3614.

3. Did you conduct a pre-test? If so, please clarify which part of the pre-test was improved. If not, why not? More details about data collection could be provided.

Response: Thank you for these important comments. We added more a clearer explanation about a pre-test as follows:

☞ In addition, in order to test the reliability of the measurement items, this study performed a pre-test survey based on 30 actual tourists using online surveys. As a result, there was no problem with the questionnaire.

4. The results of this study, as presented in the conclusion, are very short and lack depth. Therefore, detailed explanations on the results presented are needed, and more past studies need to be presented.

Response: We thank the reviewer for pointing out this. To add depth to this study, we reviewed more previous studies and presented originality. We explain the results of the study in more detail, and highlighted what theory was modified or emerged as a result of the study. In particular, this study presents differentiated results from studies in the foodservice context, where research on new technology-based services is actively conducted.

☞ Previous studies emphasized the differences in gender in the context of new technology-based services [51,52], but the study discovered that no significant difference in perceived values was found in gender. These previous studies the investigation in foodservice industry, the present study focused on the airline industry. In other words, it suggests that the importance of demographic characteristics can be different depending on the industrial background even for the same technology-based service. As a result, the present study presents the first finding of significant differences in perceived values based on demographic characteristics, which include age, education, and marital status.

☞ More specifically, the result of this study revealed that the path coefficient of the hedonic value is higher than the utilitarian value. It is a result contrary to a previous study on robot service in restaurants [70]. In the study on unmanned robot coffee shops [71], the hedonic value was not significant, and only the utilitarian value was significant. It is inferred that utilitarian value is important in the context of foodservice where products are provided. More importantly, it suggests that hedonic value is stronger in the context of travel seeking either happiness or well-being. It is the first finding of the causal relationship between perceived values and intentions to use an airport in the context of robot services.

[References]

51. Cho, A.; Hwang, J. Application of Motivated Consumer Innovativeness to the Context of Drone Food Delivery Services: Focusing on the Different Test of Demographic Factors. Journal of MICE & Tourism Research 2021, 21, 7-24.

52. Joo, K.; Hwang, J. A study on the effect of SERVQUAL on word-of-mouth intentions in the context of robotic restaurants: Focusing on demographic properties differences. Culinary Science & Hospitality Research 2022, 28, 12-22.

70. Kwak, M.K.; Lee, J.; Cha, S.S. Senior consumer motivations and perceived value of robot service restaurants in Korea. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2755.

71. Bae, J.H.; Jeon, H.M. Exploring the Relationships among Brand Experience, Perceived Product Quality, Hedonic Value, Utilitarian Value, and Brand Loyalty in Unmanned Coffee Shops during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11713.

Your research is meaningful and much appreciated.

Good luck.

Response: Again, we appreciate your positive assessment about our paper. Your comments and suggestions definitely have improved the quality of this manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx