Next Article in Journal
Effect of Environmental Courts on Pollution Abatement: A Spatial Difference-in-Differences Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Method for and Analysis of Early-Stage Firm Growth Patterns Using World Bank Data
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Effects of Digital Transformation on Total Factor Productivity of Cultural Enterprises—Empirical Evidence from 251 Listed Cultural Enterprises in China

Sustainability 2024, 16(4), 1451; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16041451
by Yaoyao Feng 1, Meng Zhao 2,* and Xiuyun Yang 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3:
Sustainability 2024, 16(4), 1451; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16041451
Submission received: 27 December 2023 / Revised: 21 January 2024 / Accepted: 5 February 2024 / Published: 8 February 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Economic and Business Aspects of Sustainability)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please see my attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The authors should write your paper more academic. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thanks for your valuable suggestion which inspired the current authors.

Our response to your suggestion can be found in the attached document.

The current authors have indicated changes in the manuscript in blue, and we thank you again for your hard work in reviewing the humble manuscript.

Yours Sincerely,

Authors

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is a well-written paper. The topic is very interesting. Literature review is thorough, hypotheses are well developed, methodology is appropriate, and conclusions are clearly stated and contribute to literature. Several questions and suggestions:

1.      It is better for the authors to define “cultural enterprises” and give some real world examples in the industry.

2.      The paper does not explain how and where to collect the data for TFP.

3.      On page 6, the paper says: “The present study also constructed a benchmark indicator regression model, which can be expressed as equation (2). Additionally, to ensure the robustness of the empirical conclusions of the present study, an auxiliary indicator regression model was constructed, as presented in equation (3)” What do you mean for “benchmark” and “auxiliary”? The readers can only tell the differences from “LP” and “OP”. The paper should explain the differences more clearly and explicitly.

4.      On page 7, the paper says: “After cleaning and redundancy processes were performed, the digital transformation indicators of cultural enterprises were constructed…” The paper should explain in detail how the index is constructed. Maybe give one real company as an example.

5.      On page 10, the paper says: “Instead, it focuses only on an enterprise’s ranking with respect to its level of digital transformation among all cultural enterprises in the enterprise’s city in a given year.” Where did the paper collect the ranking data?

6.      The paper finds that the digital transformation effect is more pronounced among small firms and firms in less developed regions, which is conflict with the general believe that large firms and firms in more developed regions will have more resources for changes and are always in the lead positions in those reforms.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing needed

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thanks for your valuable suggestion which inspired the current authors.

Our response to your suggestion can be found in the attached document.

The current authors have indicated changes in the manuscript in blue, and we thank you again for your hard work in reviewing the humble manuscript.

Yours Sincerely,

Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear author,

I am attaching a report with suggestions for improving your article.

Best regards.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thanks for your valuable suggestion which inspired the current authors.

Our response to your suggestion can be found in the attached document.

The current authors have indicated changes in the manuscript in blue, and we thank you again for your hard work in reviewing the humble manuscript.

Yours Sincerely,

Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I have thoroughly reviewed your manuscript, and I am impressed by the quality of your work. The depth of research and clarity of presentation in your study are commendable. Your efforts in examining such a complex and significant area of study are praiseworthy.

I believe your work makes a substantial contribution to the field, and I am confident that it will be well-received by the academic community. I wish you the utmost success in your future.

Best wishes,

Back to TopTop