The Impact of CKM and Customer Satisfaction on Customer Loyalty in Saudi Banking Sector: The Mediating Role of Customer Trust

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Reviewer report for article:

1.    To optimise on space on the left-hand side (review ruler).

2.    To add more references, they seem limited.

3.    Some references are repeated, e.g., Madhoushi et al, 2011).

4.    Line 60 “According to a et al, (2018), there seem to be author’s name missing.

5.    Line 62-75, there needs to be spacing so that the benefits stand out from the rest of the above and below contents/paragraphs.

6.    The Structural Model needs to be clearly visible (figure 1). Move to page 6 if there is not much space on page 5.

7.    In section “materials methods/Data Collection”, to review the future tense (will) to present or past as the data has already been collected and analysed.

8.    In section “Survey instruments”, ”, to review the future tense (will) to present or past as the survey has already been carried out in the article being presented.

9.    Line 310, Title “Table 1”, to move to page 7.

10. Line 314, the name of the company/institutions for “marketing consultants” and name of schools for “teachers” where translation was done to be provided. Also, to provide information on any software used, or whether manual translation, the time taken for same, etc. To use relevant referencing re translation.

11. Line 340, to review wordings “How fit a model is”, this does not read well.

12.Line 349, to move title “Table 4” to page 9.

13.Line 373, To move title “Table 7” to page 10.

14.Line 513, to move title “References” to page 13.

15.The referencing really needs to be worked on; it is very limited. Upgrading the references will add more value to the paper and the efforts of the research done. 

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The aim of the study is not clearly indicated in the Abstract – it should be corrected and specify one purpose.

The sentence in the Abstract, “Additionally, this study looks into the relationships between all variables, which have not previously been fully explored in the literature on the banking sector,” is not accurate. Covering “all variables” is impossible as they can differ occasionally.

I would suggest highlighting originality/value and adding “limitations” of the study in the Abstract.

“CKM” in the Keywords should be written in full.

I suggest shortening the number of hypotheses in 12 pages article.

The literature review could include more recent publications. The majority of the presented are from the previous decades.

The hypotheses raised and the chapters presented do not correspond. H3: There exist a positive relationship between CKM and customer loyalty in the Saudi Banking sector. However, the chapter below is 2.4 Customer Trust. I propose rethinking the number (shortening) of the hypothesis, and the chapters presented beyond should correspond to the hypothesis.

Fig.1 is not fully shown – it is difficult to understand/assess it.

Authors must explain what those “items” that are examined in the study are.

In “Discussion”, authors provide data. It would be great if they put the table related to those data in brackets.

The authors mentioned, “this study looks into the relationships between all variables, which have not previously been fully explored”. In the Abstract, they must clearly present the additional variable they include in this study.

Authors should revise English. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx