Determinant of M-Banking Usage and Adoption among Millennials

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article is potentially relevant. It examines the factors influencing Mobile Banking Use and Intention to Use among Malaysian Millennials. The study finds that Interface Design Quality has the highest impact, while Perceived Risk has the lowest impact. Further studies are needed to uncover additional factors.

The method used is appropriate, however, the research questions are very general and already addressed by existing and relevant literature. I feel this research is affected by a very limited level of novelty. 

The authors should demonstrate a more developed discussion and rationale for the outcomes achieved. In substance, the results, at the moment do not support relevant decision-making options in the comments. 

It might be good creating a framework/table at the end to map the results with the possible options for decision-makers.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper deals with an exciting and topical subject. But it is not well organized, already at the beginning the summary is too long and does not go to the point. It is important in the abstract to identify the research gap, the general objective, the methodology, the data, the results, etc. Our comments on the form and content are below:

 

- the graphics are poorly done and not well presented. It is often recommended to use econometric software 

- The authors should focus on one issue instead of several;

- It is crucial to announce the outline of the paper at the end of the introduction

- The literature review is poorly organized: why start the review with the case of Malaysia? Authors should start from the general framework before coming to the Malaysian case. 

- Many references on mobile banking have not been cited. 

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2022&q=Determinant+of+M-Banking+Usage+and+Adoption&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

 

- The research gap was not identified at the end of the literature review

 

- Concerning the theoretical approach, the justification of the model does not appear. Why this method seems to be more robust than others, the authors should provide explanations.

- There is a need to add detailed notes at the bottom of the tables to explain certain variables and preliminary diagnoses

- The race variable does not seem adequate. It would be better to talk about nationality (Malaysian or other)

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

A very strong article with a solid compelled literature review backed up by reliable sources. The parts of methodology and results is consistent as well. The only recommendations would be:

1. in the results' part to detail more on the confirmation (or not) of each hypotheses

2. in the conclusions' part it will be good to write something about the limitations of this research

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper has been improved