A Study of Chinese Consumers’ Consistent Use of Mobile Food Ordering Apps

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In my opinion, this is a very honestly written article. Therefore, I have no objection to its content. But I believe that two changes should be made in the initial part:

(1) I suggest that the authors write more clearly in ABSTRACT what the results of the conducted research are (from what is now visible, it is difficult to understand what the results of the research are).

(2) It seems to me that “China” in KEYWORDS should be added (because the authors themselves wrote that these results cannot be generalized too much).

 Before publication, the text should be corrected from minor linguistic errors. For example:

{77 verse} 2. literature Review (there is a lowercase letter instead of a capital letter).

{324 verse - table 1} Gender - female mail (should be male).

Spaces are often missing: US$13,233 million by 2024[12] {49 verse}; databases[14] {59 verse}; banking[39] {161 verse}; etc.

Authors should correct the entry in the bibliography, For example: {587 verse} 12. Statista. Online food delivery worldwide, 20th June, 2020. Available online: {588 verse} https://www.statista.com/outlook/374/100/online-food-delivery/worldwide (accessed on    (the date is missing)

Author Response

Dear reviewers, thank you for your valuable comments on this paper, I have revised it according to your comments, please see the attachment for details.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

69-71 The gap should be based on previous papers. It would be useful to make this more obvious.

301. Spelling error (The)

309- Do you have ethical approval for this research? If yes, state it in this methodology section.

323 –The sample size is small compared to the population using the Chinese mobile order app. Thus You need to put a justification that 212 is a representative sample of China’s mobile order app users. Also, what is the confidence level?

459- 493 – Discussion- in this section, you need to provide how your study is similar to and contrasts other studies, not only a couple of studies, and why you think this is the case in China.

 

494-515- Clearly state which papers you are contributing to.  

Author Response

Dear reviewers, thank you for your valuable comments on this paper, I have revised it according to your comments, please see the attachment for details.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic of the paper is quite relevant during the pandemic.

I have few suggestions:

11.       Moderate English correction is required

22.       Include some recent citation if possible.

33.     Divide the literature section into some sections such as 2.1., 2.2.

Currently it looks like a paragraph. Readers could lose their interest to read it.

44.   ‘5.1.1. Reliability Analysis’

[96] suggested using Cronbach 's Alpha ………..Line 350

 It is not the way Scientific paper is written.

Change it into

Fornell and Larcker [96] suggested using Cronbach 's Alpha

 

In a seminal article by [72],------------Line 266

Change it into

In a seminal article by Davis [72]……

 

 

The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), originally proposed by [1].

Change it into

The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), originally proposed by Davis [1].Line 194

 

[87] believes that the main function of trust is to reduce uncertainty…….

Change it into

Morrison and Firmstone [87] believes that the main function of trust is to reduce uncertainty ………………………………………………………………………………..Line 295

 

as [86]suggest that customers with higher habit are more

Change it into

as Khalifa and Liu [86] suggest that customers with higher habit are more….Line 291

Table 7 gives the results of the direct effects of the structural model, including the coefficients and their significance.

 

Change it into

Table 7 indicates the results of the direct ……………………………………Line 437

 

In this paper H1 (ß = 0.119 p = 0.092) is not significant this is contrary to [38] study

Change it into

In this paper H1 (ß = 0.119 p = 0.092) is not significant this is contrary to Lee and Kwon study………………………………………………Line 469

 

55.       Table 7 gives the results of the direct effects of the structural model, including the coefficients and their significance.

It is duplicate with previous line. Delete this line.

66.     Finally, Validation of the moderating effect of habit…………………………Line 450

Complete the sentence. It is difficult to understand the meaning.

Author Response

Dear reviewers, thank you for your valuable comments on this paper, I have revised it according to your comments, please see the attachment for details.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx