Investor Perception of ESG Performance: Examining Investment Intentions in the Chinese Stock Market with Social Self-Efficacy Moderation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors, It was my pleasure to review your paper entitled “Examining Investment Intentions in Chinese Stock Market with Social Self-efficacy Moderation. The paper has certain merits. However, some weaknesses need to be addressed.

Weaknesses in the Introduction:

1. Lack of Clarity: The introduction lacks clarity in presenting the main objective of the study. While it discusses the evolution and significance of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations in companies, it fails to clearly state the specific research questions or aims that the study seeks to address. As a result, the reader may find it challenging to understand the focus and purpose of the research from the outset.
2. Overwhelming Detail: The introduction provides an extensive overview of the historical development of ESG concepts and their adoption in China, including specific events, initiatives, and statistics. While some background information is essential to contextualize the study, the excessive detail may overwhelm the reader and distract from the main points. This could potentially lead to reader fatigue and diminish the impact of the introduction in capturing the reader's interest.
3. Lack of Coherence: The introduction lacks coherence in seamlessly connecting the various historical events and trends related to ESG adoption in China. The transition between different stages of evolution and initiatives appears abrupt, making it difficult for the reader to follow the logical flow of ideas. As a result, the introduction appears disjointed and fragmented, hindering the reader's comprehension of the overall narrative.
4. Insufficient Contextualization: While the introduction provides extensive background information on the global and Chinese contexts of ESG adoption, it lacks sufficient contextualization of the specific research context and rationale for the study. This lack of contextualization diminishes the significance and relevance of the study's findings. Moreover, the lengthy paragraphs and absence of transitions context these paragraphs make the text somehow less attractive to capture the readers’ interest.  

Weaknesses in the Conceptual Model:

1.       Limited Justification: While the introduction of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is relevant for understanding the relationship between investor attitudes and intentions, the rationale for choosing TPB over other theories is not adequately justified. The author briefly mentions previous theories used in similar contexts but fails to explain why TPB is the most appropriate framework for exploring investor attitudes and intentions specifically within the context of corporate ESG performance. This lack of justification leaves the reader questioning the suitability and validity of TPB for the study's objectives.

2.       Lack of Integration: The discussion of TPB is presented in isolation, without clear integration with the broader conceptual framework of the study. The author briefly mentions the components of TPB (attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control) but does not demonstrate how these components relate to the study's specific research questions or hypotheses. As a result, the conceptual model appears disconnected from the theoretical underpinnings of TPB, leading to ambiguity regarding its applicability to the study.

3.       Inconsistent Definitions: The definitions of key concepts such as "attitude" and "intention" are provided but lack consistency in their application throughout the text. For example, while the definition of attitude is briefly discussed in investment decision-making, it is not consistently applied in subsequent discussions of investor perceptions and attitudes toward ESG performance. This inconsistency in terminology and conceptualization undermines the clarity and coherence of the conceptual model.

Weaknesses in the methodology:

In the first lines of section 3.2, the authors mentioned that “The study is carried out using a sequential mixed-method approach that begins first with interviews and then releases questionnaires survey. It begins with the collection and analysis of qualitative data before moving on to acquire quantitative data (Ajzen 2020). This method is useful for exploring phenomena while creating and testing new instruments, ensuring thorough knowledge and reliable validation of findings to enhance the clarity of the questionnaires (Liao, Chen, and Yen 2007). This is misleading. They further added “Thus, five field experts were interviewed in this research, aiding in refining the clarity of the questions. Based on their recommendations, minor adjustments were made to the questionnaires’ items to better suit the Chinese stock market”. These statements are wrong. The authors simply used expert judgment to develop the questionnaires or to validate instruments previously developed. Moreover, no qualitative data are reported to substantiate the claim of the sequential mixed-method approach. I suggest that the authors simply mention “research design and instrument”. Tell the readers that the survey instrument was built based on expert judgment and the relevant literature.

Analysis. To strengthen the analysis, control for age, gender, occupation Experience in investing in Stock Market, and so on. In SEM, conduct two separate analyses and report the findings with and without the control variables to see if there are any confounding effects.

Why Cronbach’s Alpha(α) not Omega? Please, see “Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. But…. Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1-24”.

Additionally, the text needs to be proofread. Avoid mistakes throughout the paper. Consider the following instead:  

H1: Investors' perceptions of corporate environmental performance positively influence their attitude toward Chinese stocks.

H2: Investors' perceptions of corporate environmental performance positively influence their intention toward Chinese stocks.

I hope these comments will help improve the current manuscript.

Consider editing the paper. Avoid long sentences and paragraphs. Consider connecting sentences with the appropriate word of transition. Do the same for the paragraphs. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate the feedback you provided for our manuscript. Your insights are invaluable and essential to us. Our team has diligently addressed each of your suggestions, aiming to meet your expectations. The modified or added sections in the manuscript are highlighted in red text, while all deletions are marked with yellow highlighting. Please see the attachment, it is the summary of the modifications we have made according to your feedback. We are deeply grateful for all of your invaluable suggestions, which have significantly improved our work.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is very interesting.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We sincerely appreciate your positive feedback on our manuscript. It brings us great pleasure to know that our work has resonated with you. Moving forward, we are committed to continually improving both our research and writing skills, with the aim of making meaningful contributions to the field of ESG studies. Once again, thank you for your support and encouragement.

Reviewer 3 Report

Please see the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate the feedback you provided for our manuscript. Your insights are invaluable and essential to us. Our team has diligently addressed each of your suggestions, aiming to meet your expectations. The modified or added sections in the manuscript are highlighted in red text. Please see the attachment, it is the summary of the modifications we have made according to your feedback. We are deeply grateful for all of your invaluable suggestions, which have significantly improved our work.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Methodologically, this research fills a gap in ESG literature by employing a primary data collection approach, contrasting with the majority of ESG studies which depend on secondary data. The utilization of surveys to collect individual-level ESG perception data is particularly notable, as it offers insights into retail investors' attitudes towards ESG factors— an area less explored compared to institutional investors. However, the study inherently includes a limitation.

The concept of perception, which I find challenging to measure, may carry significant implications. It is necessary to distinguish it from other concepts, such as a firm's size, media coverage, or reputation, which could be confused with "certain area perception". Therefore, it is imperative to include the survey sheet and a method that can differentiate these or incorporate control variables. Despite this, the study contributes significantly to the literature on ESG investing by demonstrating the impactful role of ESG performance perceptions on individual investor behavior in the Chinese market.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate the feedback you provided for our manuscript. Your insights are invaluable and essential to us. The modified or added sections in the article are highlighted in red text. Please see the attachment, it is the summary of the modifications we have made according to your feedback. We are deeply grateful for all of your invaluable suggestions, which have significantly improved our work.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The revision meets my expectations. Good job!

Reviewer 4 Report

well revised.