Sustainable Fashion and Consumption Patterns in Peru: An Environmental-Attitude-Intention-Behavior Analysis
, Aldo Alvarez-Risco 1, Romina Gómez-Prado 1, Berdy Briggitte Cuya-Velásquez 1, Sharon Esquerre-Botton 1, Flavio Morales-RÃos 1, Camila Almanza-Cruz 1, Sarahit Castillo-Benancio 1, Maria de las Mercedes Anderson-Seminario 1, Shyla Del-Aguila-Arcentales 2 and Jaime A. Yáñez 3,4,*
Anca Constantinescu-Dobra
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Congratulation on your paper.
I do not consider the article original, but I hope it reflects the Peru point of view.
The authors have to give more information regarding the sample. As they say it is a special category "consumers of fashion items reached through social media" line 241.
I am not sure that the results of the research represents the opinion of common population from PERU. It seems that are people with high degree of awareness regarding sustainable fashion and environmental issues. This fact has to be detailed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors analyze the influence of Environmental Attitude (EA) in Purchase Intention and Purchase Behavior in a documented way. Although, I consider that the weakest part of the article is the sample. It could be added some extra information about it. You said on line 241 "consumers of fashion items reached through social media" and you have to define what those it means. Precisely, who are those respondents? What is the frequency did they buy clothes? On what social media platform they are present? Is the sample size representative? According to what method do you calculate it?
Consequently, the results could be more sustained by findings from other researches.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The topic of this study is interesting and the paper is well structured and clearly written. However, there are still some missing that can be improved.
1. First, I am surprised the introduction is so short. The authors should emphasize the importance of this research question, the gap between the past related literature and this research question, and clearly define the keywords relevant to this study.
2. Some error need to be revised, for example, the "PK" in Figure 1 and Figure 2 should be changed to "PEK".
3. The reasons for using SmartPLS should be explained.
4. Please add HTMT to explain discriminant validity.
5. Please add a note about common method bias analysis.
6. Please add a note about non-response bias analysis.
7. Please add a note about model fit.
8. The discussion should be an in-depth discussion of the findings of this study, rather than a description of the theoretical implications, practical implications, and limitations to future research, and should be placed in the conclusion.
9. Finally, for future work, related extension questions should be provided about the research topic itself, not just the limitations of the survey location or the sampling method.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
We congratulate the authors for having revised the paper in response to the reviewers' comments. We have no further comments.
