Next Article in Journal
‘Focusing and Unfocusing’—Cognitive, Evaluative, and Emotional Dynamics in the Relationship with Human Embryos among ART Beneficiaries
Previous Article in Journal
Involvement and Multi-Sectoral Collaboration: Applying Principles of Health Promotion during the Implementation of Local Policies and Measures—A Case Study
Peer-Review Record

Identities and Precariousness in the Collaborative Economy, Neither Wage-Earner, nor Self-Employed: Emergence and Consolidation of the Homo Rider, a Case Study

Societies 2022, 12(1), 6;
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Societies 2022, 12(1), 6;
Received: 15 November 2021 / Revised: 23 December 2021 / Accepted: 23 December 2021 / Published: 28 December 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Digital Transformation and the Labour Market Inequalities)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report


The article is original and of ethnographic and socio-political interest. For the future, it is suggested to compare the "homo rider" prototype described with the classical "homo faber" prototype and also study the links between "homo rider" and "homo ludens" as two complementary perspectives of time occupation. In addition, it is proposed to relate the "homo rider" prototype with sociological research on needs, implicit beliefs (TIPs) and expectations of the centennial generations, to compare the social mode of production with the beliefs of the working subjects in that system. The article opens a very promising area of ​​research with ramifications in Psychology, Sociology and Labor Law.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments. We find it very interesting that perspective to take into account with homo ludens and homo faber. In this sense, we could advance further, in other works, in those differences inherent to the 4th industrial revolution, and how homo rider is linked to that technology as a great differentiation from the rest of "homos".

In the same way, it also seems to us that it is a subject that allows an analysis from different areas of knowledge. Contemporary labor relations as the framework where these social, cultural and psychological relations occur. 

Best regards

Reviewer 2 Report

The collaborative economy - with its advantages and disadvantages - is a relatively new solution that requires further in-depth research. Therefore, the topic undertaken by the authors is important and current. The manuscript is interesting, easy to read and follow. It is good that papers in this area are being written, although this manuscript needs further work. In particular:

  • My most important comment concerns the number of respondents. 10 interviewees are not enough to draw generalized conclusions. The use of scientific methodology distinguishes a scientific article from a popular science article. Too few interviewees is a weakness of the research approach used. The study can be regarded as a preliminary, pilot study. Such information should be included in the Introduction section.
  • The title of the article should refer to the place of the research. The sample is too small to generalize the study.
  • In the Introduction Section, it is useful to set the research hypothesis/questions, which will indicate the direction of the research from the beginning of the article.
  • Figure 2 should be in English.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments. They are of great importance to improve our proposal. 

In lines 90-94 we have introduced a paragraph that justifies the 10 interviews and refers to your suggestion: that this is a first approach to the phenomenon.

We have also specified in the title that this is a research related to the city of Murcia (Spain).

In the introduction we have included proposed hypotheses and specific questions. You can find it on lines 95-113

Regarding figure 2, since it is taken from an author referred to in the text, it is not possible to edit the English text. What we do is to explain it (translate the concepts) in the text, so that the reader will have no problem in interpreting it. This is what we do (written in red) on lines 226-229

Again, thank you very much for your comments and your time.

Kind regards,

Reviewer 3 Report

This is a highly original and very accurate paper that investigates a new issue for science and society - the organization of labor of employees working in the platform cooperative economy. I have practically no significant comments, since all the necessary elements of the research are completed in full. 

There are several wishes for authors, which are recommended to be taken into account before publishing.

  1. There is no analytics in paper that could add an empirical background to the main reasoning and conclusions of the authors. I propose to think about what analytical data could be presented. For example, it would be very interesting to see the dynamics of employment in platform-type companies.
  2. It is necessary to expand or more clearly specify the practical recommendations that follow from the results of the study. What should businesses and regulators do to resolve the identified homo riders issues? 
  3. Two comments on the design of the text and graphics: a) the inscriptions in Figure 2 must be in English, b) it is necessary to increase the font size in lines 223-226. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments that help us to improve our proposal.

On the first question, it is true that our interest was in focusing on the people who work on these platforms (riders). This is an ethnographic approach, so our analysis is derived from the testimonies of the informants that we have classified in these two dimensions: material and ideological. We are aware that this is a first approximation, almost a pilot work, which in the future deserves a revision and another analysis. To make this idea clear, we have included this reflection in the introduction, in lines 90-94. We have also included hypotheses and specific questions in lines 95-113.

On the second issue,  a small reflection has been introduced in the lines 761-769 from the perspective that it points out.

Finally, we have corrected the font size error. Regarding Figure 2 in English, since it is an original fragment from a Spanish author, we have not been able to edit it. However, all the indications (translation) have been given so that readers do not have problems when interpreting the figure.

Again, thank you very much for your comments and for your time.


Back to TopTop