Sustainability for Predicting Customer Lifetime Value: A Mediation–Moderation Effect Across SEO Metrics in Europe

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study examines how SEO metrics mediate and moderate the relationship between corporate sustainability (ESG) and Customer Lifetime Value (CLV) using PLS-SEM analysis of 296 European firms. Overall, I think it’s an interesting paper. I have the following comments.

1. Based on the literature including the cited ones such as Kong et al. (2021), consumer sustainability consciousness should be added as a moderator. Current model totally ignores how user attitudes affect SEO-CLV pathways.

2. As to developing Hypothesis H2, I think it's better to explicitly link ESG reporting transparency to domain authority building via backlink acquisition.

3. Did the sampling timeframe of your work coincide with some large search engine (such as Google)’s algorithm updates? I think it should be well discussed since it will affect SEO metrics.

4. High-ESG firms could show lower greenwashing as evidenced in literature, but could this create “credibility complacency”, reducing SEO investment? I think you can provide some relevant discussion.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. A new version of the manuscript is newly drafted in red as response integrated for all reviewers. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript titled “Sustainability for Predicting Customer Lifetime Value: A Mediation–Moderation Effect Across SEO Metrics in Europe” offers an original and timely contribution by exploring how digital marketing metrics, specifically SEO indicators, mediate and moderate the relationship between sustainability and customer lifetime value (CLV). This intersection between ESG metrics, website performance, and marketing outcomes is relevant for both academic and managerial audiences. The authors present a research model, supported by PLS-SEM, applied to a dataset of European sustainable firms.

However, despite the relevance of the topic, the manuscript requires major revisions before it can be considered for publication. Several issues undermine the clarity, methodological robustness, and theoretical contribution of the work. Below are specific concerns and recommendations:

 

1. The research gap is poorly articulated. The justification for the study is based primarily on model construction rather than a comprehensive literature review that identifies missing knowledge in existing research. The introduction should better articulate: What is already known in the field? What are the specific theoretical or empirical gaps this paper addresses? Why is it important to study the mediating/moderating role of SEO in this context—who cares, and why now? Currently, the discussion of source credibility theory is not well connected to the hypotheses or the broader argument. The authors should clarify how the theory underpins the proposed relationships.

 

2. The moderating hypothesis (H5) appears ad hoc and lacks theoretical grounding. It gives the impression that the authors tested several models until statistical significance emerged—a classic case of data-driven hypothesis formulation. The paper must clearly justify a priori why website traffic (SEO_T) should moderate the indirect effect between ESG and CLV. As it stands, the moderation feels bolted-on rather than conceptually driven. Why not considering moderation in the other relationships?

 

3. Table 3 (Structural Model) lacks p-values, which are standard in SEM result reporting. Only confidence intervals are provided. This makes it difficult to assess the statistical robustness of each path coefficient. The authors should include exact p-values for all direct, indirect, and moderating effects. The beta value and 95% confidence intervals alone are insufficient, especially when the confidence intervals are very narrow or border zero (as in the moderation effect). The testing of hypotheses could benefit from clearer linkage to the theoretical framework, especially in the discussion section. The results are overly descriptive and fail to synthesize a "so what?" interpretation.

 

4. The results section focuses heavily on reporting path coefficients and model fit indices, but it fails to address the big picture: What are the key takeaways for sustainability and marketing researchers? What do the results imply about the role of digital engagement in ESG communication? Are there practical benchmarks or thresholds managers should consider (e.g., SEO scores)?

 

5. The conclusion is missing several essential components: Theoretical contributions; Practical implications; Limitations and Future research directions.

 

Other issues

Some terminology needs refinement. For example, “Woozle effect” is introduced but not sufficiently explained for readers unfamiliar with the term.

The methodology is fairly detailed, but the data collection timeline and source synchronization should be clearer to ensure the consistency of the SEO and financial data across firms.

 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. A new version of the manuscript is newly drafted in red as response integrated for all reviewers. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study offers an original and well-timed contribution by integrating sustainability performance with customer lifetime value (CLV) via SEO metrics, particularly through a moderated mediation framework. The use of PLS-SEM is appropriate, and the model validity is well addressed. While the core content is intelligible, there are numerous grammatical and syntactical issues throughout the paper. A professional language edit is recommended to enhance readability and academic tone. Some sentences are lengthy or awkwardly structured, which can obscure meaning. The structure follows logical progression, but transitions between sections, especially in the discussion and conclusion, could be improved. Consider summarizing key results more concisely before delving into their implications. The theoretical contributions are well grounded, yet the explanation of the mediation-moderation mechanism could be clarified. For example, the distinct roles of SEO_T and SEO_R in influencing CLV might benefit from a more intuitive narrative, possibly supported by practical examples. The section on limitations is appreciated. However, elaborating more specifically on how future studies might overcome the geographic and sectoral limitations would enhance its utility. Certain technical aspects, such as the critique of reflective models in PLS-SEM or the "woozle effect", might be unfamiliar to some readers. Consider briefly explaining these terms or referencing foundational works earlier in the paper for clarity. The manuscript is well-referenced with relevant and recent literature. Ensure that all citations are formatted consistently and that URLs (e.g., for online sources) are accessible and complete.

In summary, the manuscript presents an innovative approach to a pressing subject but requires refinement in language and clarity to reach its full potential.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The manuscript would benefit from a thorough language review. While the core ideas are communicated, issues with grammar, sentence structure, and word choice affect clarity in several sections. Improving the English will enhance the readability and professional tone of the article. A professional copyedit is recommended prior to publication.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. A new version of the manuscript is newly drafted in red as response integrated for all reviewers. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have made revisions accordingly and the manuscript has been improved. I think its' good for publication.

Author Response

I sincerely appreciate your feedback. It has been a pleasure to revise the manuscript based on your valuable suggestions. A new version of the manuscript is newly drafted in red as response integrated for all reviewers. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congrats on the revision

Author Response

I sincerely appreciate your feedback. It has been a pleasure to revise the manuscript based on your valuable suggestions. A new version of the manuscript is newly drafted in red as response integrated for all reviewers. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript presents a timely and original contribution to the intersection of sustainability, digital marketing, and predictive modeling. The focus on how SEO metrics mediate and moderate the relationship between sustainability practices and customer lifetime value (CLV) is both innovative and empirically robust. The structure is clear and well-organized, with a strong theoretical foundation anchored in source credibility theory and a critical engagement with the PLS-SEM methodology. The use of third-party data sources such as Moz, Ahrefs, and Similar web adds credibility and practical relevance to the findings.

Suggestions:

• While the engagement with literature is strong, the discussion could benefit from a deeper reflection on the implications for firms in sectors beyond technology and industrial, possibly anticipating broader applicability.
• The limitations section is adequate but could be strengthened by addressing potential biases introduced by relying solely on digital metrics and not incorporating direct customer feedback.
• Future research directions could further elaborate on how other digital marketing channels (e.g., social media, content marketing) might also play a role in sustainability–CLV linkages, extending the scope beyond SEO.
• Overall, this is a well-executed and valuable piece of research that meets high academic standards.

Author Response

I sincerely appreciate your feedback. It has been a pleasure to revise the manuscript based on your valuable suggestions. A new version of the manuscript is newly drafted in red as response integrated for all reviewers. 

REVIEWER:

• While the engagement with literature is strong, the discussion could benefit from a deeper reflection on the implications for firms in sectors beyond technology and industrial, possibly anticipating broader applicability.
• The limitations section is adequate but could be strengthened by addressing potential biases introduced by relying solely on digital metrics and not incorporating direct customer feedback.

AUTHOR´S REPLY, IT INCLUDED FROM LINE 604 TO THE END

Regarding the limitations, the primary one of this study is the sample we used: publicly traded companies from the Refinitiv Thomson Reuters Eikon database, which is confined to Europe and includes only the industrial and technology sectors. Likewise, our SEO implementation approach could be complemented by other sectors or industries to generalise the research results. We would advocate for comprehensive studies involving a broader range of countries and industries to anticipate a wider applicability of our study. A second limitation pertains to the digital marketing metric, as we considered only two composites (four indicators) based on SEO for websites. In fact, SEO techniques encompass a wider array of measures. Additional studies could include data collection for digital sustainability, that is, metrics within the digital and analytics scope. 

REVIEWER

• Future research directions could further elaborate on how other digital marketing channels (e.g., social media, content marketing) might also play a role in sustainability–CLV linkages, extending the scope beyond SEO.

AUTHOR´S REPLY, IT INCLUDED FROM LINE 604 TO THE END

Future research could further elaborate on how other digital marketing channels (e.g., social media, content marketing) or strategies (e.g., viral marketing, affiliate marketing) might also play a role in sustainability–CLV linkages, extending the scope beyond SEO. Firms that provide processed customer and internet user data are becoming increasingly specialised, which can facilitate the development of predictive causal models in business. Despite the opportunity this represents for academic research, it requires a well-applied methodology, as we have discussed in this study on the Woozle effect; otherwise, we may reach pseudoscientific conclusions.