Multidimensional Evaluation of Consumers’ Shopping Risks under Live-Streaming Commerce
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Author(s),
I have read your manuscript proposal entitled "Multi-dimensional evaluation of consumers’ shopping risks under live streaming commerce" and I have the following concerns and recommendations to be addressed.
1. In the Introduction, at the rows 33 - 34 you have the text: "For example, Li Jiaqi’s live broadcast room achieved a transaction volume of 21.5 billion RMB on just one night, October 24, 2022 [2]." Please try to also present the value from RMB in EUR or USD, because these are the international currencies and the Sustainability Journal is an international one.
2. Please add some short new paragraphs in the Introduction in order to structure the following important elements:
- the research gap;
- the research goal;
- the research question(s).
It is important for the readers to have these elements in a structured and clear manner in the Introdcution chapter of the article.
3. I consider that you should seriously improve the chapter "2. Consumers’ Shopping Risk Evaluation Framework in Live Streaming Commerce" and renaming it "2. Background". Beside the text already existing, I recommend you to also include the following relevant works: https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer16040058, https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12132857, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEB.2023.130165, https://doi.org/10.3390/su15119085. By including these valuable resources, you will improve the general context of your research proposal.
4. At the end of the chapter 2, please define and describe the research hypotheses. A research article should include at least one research hypothesis.
5. At the rows 108 - 109 you have "Figure 1. Analysis framework for evaluating consumers’ shopping risks in live streaming commerce". Please specify the source of the figure.
6. At the row 219 you present the intuitionistic fuzzy judgment matrix ?? for the first-level indicators. I don't understand where these values come from. Please include a description about the data source.
7. Before the "5. Conclusions and Future Research", please insert a "Discussion" chapter and compare your research results to other results from the extant scientific literature. Also, please highlight your contribution to the field of knowledge.
Dear Author(s),
Please consider all the above remarks as being constructive recommendations in order to improve the general quality of your manuscript proposal.
Kind Regards!
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper devotes to propose an analysis results to evaluate consumers’ shopping risks on live streaming commerce platforms. The framework is applied to evaluate consumers’ shopping risks on four typical live streaming commerce platforms in various countries.
The introduction does not adequately discuss how and why you planned to conduct this research, what the future benefits of this research will be to upcoming scholars, and what the findings of this study are. Make sure to:
1. Establish an area to research by highlighting the importance of the topic, and/or making general statements about the topic, and/or presenting an overview of current research on the subject.
2. Identify a research niche by opposing an existing assumption, and/or revealing a gap in existing research, and/or formulating a research question or problem, and/or continuing a disciplinary tradition.
Literature Review
The literature review appears incomplete, is not critical, nor is there sufficient academic support for the arguments in the article. There is a lack of critical synthesis of the studies reviewed in the literature review, i.e., the literature review appears to be descriptive rather than a critical analysis of the examined studies. The critical evaluation of each work should consider:
• Provenance -- what are the author’s credentials? Are the author’s arguments supported by evidence [e.g., primary historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent scientific findings]?
Conclusion
The Conclusion does not adequately discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of the study. Summarize your thoughts and convey the larger significance of your research. Identify and discuss how a gap in the literature has been addressed and demonstrate the importance of your ideas. Introduce possible new or expanded ways of thinking about the research problem.
Also, state the ideas for future research in the conclusion. Make sure you create 3 subsections in the Conclusion: 1) Theoretical implications, 2) Managerial Implications, and 3) Ideas for Future Research.
You may wish to study published articles that examine perspectives on this topic, which will give you an idea of how you must revise your article.
can be improved
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper devotes to propose an analysis results to evaluate consumers’ shopping risks on live streaming commerce platforms. The framework is applied to evaluate consumers’ shopping risks on four typical live streaming commerce platforms in various countries.
Strengths: Presenting all simulation results properly, presenting the framework with suitable graphs, making all descriptions in a proper way where the readers can understand well.
Weaknesses: The weaknesses are the ones presented in the comment section for example, adding a comparison table.
For realizing the achieved results more clearly, presenting some outcomes with figures are appreciated.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Author(s),
I appreciate your effort to improve the article. After reading the revised version of the manuscript, I have the following minor recommendations:
- in the chapter "2. Background", at the rows 134 - 141, you are defining the research hypotheses. I recommend you to support and justify these hypotheses by using some relevant references from the literature.
- under "Figure 2. Consumers’ shopping risk evaluation index system in live streaming commerce", please specify the source of the image.
- at the row 291, there are 2 "merged" words: "...Table 2The...". Please revise and correct.
- in figure 3, the images {e) and (f) seems to be the same. Please take a look and update them if necessary.
- in the chapter "6. Conclusions and Future Research" please include a new paragraph describing the research limitations.
Kind regards!
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have provided the comments and I have no further comment.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your reply.
