Walking the Talk: Unraveling the Influence of the Sustainability Features of Leather Alternatives on Consumer Behavior toward Running Shoes

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study delves into the influence of sustainability features in running shoes on consumers' willingness to pay a premium. It explores the mediating role of perceived sustainability and the moderating effects of environmental consciousness and animal conservation. The paper is well-structured, presents the conceptual model supported by the literature review, describes the methodology, and utilizes appropriate statistical procedures to test the raised hypotheses.Data collected via an online survey on Amazon MTurk were analyzed using statistical methods like ANOVA to assess the impact of sustainability features on willingness to pay. Mediation and moderation analyses using the PROCESS model in SPSS 28.0 revealed that sustainability features significantly impact consumers' willingness to pay more. Perceived sustainability partially mediates this relationship, while environmental consciousness and animal conservation act as moderators, influencing consumers' willingness to pay a premium. Overall, this research provides valuable insights into how sustainability attributes affect consumer behavior regarding running shoes.

 However, I believe that the paper can be improved, so I recommend:

(1)   Add the term 'consumer behavior' to the keywords;

(2)   Update the literature review. In scientific databases (Scopus, Wos) it is possible to identify current studies on this object of study (2022 and 2023) that help to reinforce the literature review,

(3)   Improve the discussion of the results; comparing and contrasting the results obtained in the study with the studies and authors identified in the literature review, especially those that contributed to the development of the conceptual model and supported the hypotheses. In this way, it is possible to contextualize the findings obtained in the study and highlight how they align with or diverge from previous research.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The Authors provide a well-structured and clear presentation of the influence that specific sustainability features can have on the expressed intention of consumers to purchase running shoes. The analysis is straightforward and the implications of the results are discussed in the relevant section. The limitations are also detailed and cover several key areas that could be developed through future studies. Please find below some suggestions for improving manuscript.

1.       Please clarify what wat the target population of the study. Why are only respondents aged 18-30 included in the sample? What was the sampling procedure? How did you ensure the adequate distribution of the three product cards so that a correct control group could be established?

2.       Please consider whether the formulation of the title is not overly ambitious compared to the contents of the manuscript. For example, “consumption of running shoes” is not truly explored in the study. Rather, stated intention to pay a premium for specific product features is analyzed.

3.       In section 3.1, the Authors mention three product cards. Please illustrate them in order to clarify what actual information the respondents received about the product.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper investigates the influence of sustainability features in running shoes on consumers' willingness to pay a premium price, examining the mediating role of perceived sustainability and the moderating effects of environmental consciousness and animal conservation. Data was collected through an online survey, analyzed using ANOVA, mediation, and moderation analysis in SPSS 28.0. The findings highlight the significance of sustainability features on consumers' willingness to pay a premium, with perceived sustainability acting as a partial mediator. The study also identifies the moderating impact of environmental consciousness and animal conservation on the relationship between sustainability features and willingness to pay a premium.

My Comments:

1. Could you elaborate more on the selection criteria for the sample from Amazon MTurk, ensuring it sufficiently represents diverse consumer demographics?

2. How did you control for potential confounding variables in the mediation analysis, and can you discuss the robustness of the mediating role of perceived sustainability?

3. Can you provide more insight into the nature of moderation effects of environmental consciousness and animal conservation? How significant are these effects in influencing consumers' willingness to pay?

4. How were the specific sustainability features chosen? Was there any pre-study validation to ensure these features effectively represent sustainability in consumers' minds?

5. Have you considered comparing consumer responses across different product categories with varying degrees of sustainability relevance? How might such comparisons contribute to understanding consumers' preferences?

6. How might future research bridge the gap between willingness to pay, as measured in this study, and actual purchasing behavior regarding sustainable products?

7. Would extending the study to different cultural contexts or geographic regions provide more comprehensive insights into the role of demographics in consumer responses to sustainability features?

8. Beyond mentioning the materials used, have you explored the impact of different communication strategies on consumers' perceptions of sustainability features? For instance, how might storytelling or visual representations influence consumer responses?

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for addressing my concerns.