Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

First of all, I want to say to the authors that this work present interesting ideas that are potentially of interest to both academics and practitioners. And this is well designed, carefully conducted empirical research for the field of Information Journal.

I find this work interesting and honest. But I would like to suggest some ideas to further improve the manuscript. The included comments must be seen as recommendations to improve the quality of the presented work.

This paper seeks to develop the scale of the users’ usage intention of online learning applications and identify the factors that influence the users’ continuance usage intention of online learning applications from the user perspective using the extended TAM in order to improve user-centered design for mobile learning applications.

The introduction of the paper delves adequately into the specific research methodology and sample issues. The review of literature it seems so enough, but this field of research is very important and there are significant applied studies. The bibliography should be updated. We do not find any paper for the years 2018 and 2019 and only two of the year 2016 and 2017.

The research questions are not well developed. It would be necessary to clarify the objectives and argued. On the other hand, I consider the hypotheses well-argued and well-founded.

The methodology used can be deemed appropriate, and the authors’ presentation of the results is clear and concise, thus facilitating the reader’s understanding, but it would be necessary to deepen in the limitations of the chosen methodology, especially if the survey has been self-administered.

It would be interesting to know whether the results presented differ from previous studies. This would add value to the findings.

Finally, in the discussion and conclusion section it is so remarkable that the authors introduce research limitations and future research lines, but it would be interesting deep in managerial implications

Author Response

Dear editor,   

Thanks very much for the valuable suggestions, accordingly, we have carefully revised the manuscript. Enclosed please find the one-to-one responses to reviewers’ comments.   

Warmest wishes,  

 Yours sincerely,   

Zhen-hua Yang 

 Reviewer #1: The introduction of the paper delves adequately into the specific research methodology and sample issues. The review of literature it seems so enough, but this field of research is very important and there are significant applied studies. The bibliography should be updated. We do not find any paper for the years 2018 and 2019 and only two of the year 2016 and 2017. 

Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have downloaded and read the new literature carefully, which are very useful for our work. Therefore, we have included some new literature in the bibliography. 

 Reviewer #2: The research questions are not well developed. It would be necessary to clarify the objectives and argued. On the other hand, I consider the hypotheses well-argued and well-founded. 

 Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have rewrote the hypotheses and make it well-argued and well-founded as possible as we can. 

 Reviewer #3: It would be interesting to know whether the results presented differ from previous studies. This would add value to the findings. 

 Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We added  the results presented differ from previous studies. For instance, traditionally, classic online educators often release products ignoring the gender differences. However, the results of this study show that gender is a concern for the online learning applications. 

 Reviewer #4: Finally, in the discussion and conclusion section it is so remarkable that the authors introduce research limitations and future research lines, but it would be interesting deep in managerial implications 

Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We added  many managerial implications in our new manusript. For instance, as the system characteristics and facilitating conditions are the most important factors which influence the users’ continuance usage  intention of using online learning applications, it is significant for emphasizing the excellent output quality and great convenience of using the online learning applications. In addition, if the online  learning application can interact with much pleasant, it will attract more users to participate in online learning.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Editor

Thank you for inviting me to review this manuscript. I attached my personal review.

Best regards,

Rocco Servidio

The paper addresses a very interesting topic. Most of the studies discussed are consistent with the design of the research. I am a bit concerned about the dimension of “Individual differences”, whose items are not properly coherent with the description of the factor. Anxiety, for example, is different from self-efficacy. In fact, in the previous studies anxiety was a single factor. In addition, all the reference to justify this factor are partially consistent. I think that the Authors should reconsider the opportunity to select the items of the factor. In alternative, could describe it in a more generic way by avoiding including personality aspects.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thanks very much for the valuable suggestions, accordingly, we have carefully revised the manuscript. Please find the one-to-one responses to your comments.  

Warmest wishes,    

Yours sincerely,  

Zhen-hua Yang

Reviewer #1: The paper addresses a very interesting topic. Most of the studies discussed are consistent with the design of the research. I am a bit concerned about the dimension of “Individual differences”, whose items are not properly coherent with the description of the factor.

Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion. According to the TAM3 model, the variable
individual differences includes computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, computer
playfulness and perception of external control (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). And the computer anxiety means the degree of an individual’s apprehension, or even fear, when she/he is faced with the possibility of using computers (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000).

Reviewer #2: In alternative, could describe it in a more generic way by avoiding including personality aspects

Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have modified the full draft in a more generic way as possible as we can.