The Influence of Sustainable Positioning on eWOM and Brand Loyalty: Analysis of Credible Sources and Transparency Practices Based on the S-O-R Model

(1) The selection of the research sample was not explained

Thank you for your comment. We included the “random responses” on line 543.

Also, we have added the below lines:

This study collected data from United States Gen Zers because the US apparel market is the largest market in the world (Statista, 2021) and Gen Zers are the most influential customer group interested in sustainable products (Furbe, 2020). (Line 548-552)

(2) Why 8 aspects? and what tool were assigned to these 8 groups

Thank you for the comment. There are 8 conditions developed using a 4 by 2 factorial design (4 x 2=8), and the Qualtrics online survey platform has a function that allows us to randomly assign participants into one of the eight conditions when they entered the survey link. Figure 2 has a detailed breakdown of each condition. We developed conditions based on the recommendations from Sahin et al., (2020) which suggested that displaying support from credible sources such as third-party environmental groups and making substantive statements in practices can mitigate the greenwashing perceptiveness. By looking into the literature, we found Cho and Berry (2019) and Whitson et al. (2014) endorsed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seal as trustworthy among both the general population and environmentally conscious consumers as it is affiliated with a government agency and may assist in guaranteeing that the retailer's disclosed information is valid and trustworthy. Moreover, we found nowadays, many studies used social media influencers and celebrities as credible sources to examine marketing effectiveness, raise product awareness and make apparel purchasing decisions (Colley & Yancy, 2019; Lim et al., 2017; Schouten et al., 2020). Also, transparency is becoming a widely used term to communicate and persuade consumers about brands' sustainable practices. Thus, from the suggestions from the studies of Yan et al. (2012) and Bhaduri and Jung (2015) findings, this study developed the transparency aspects. (Detailed in Line 121 - 150)

This research was conducted using an online between-subject experiment. We developed eight conditions by using a 4 (No Credible Source / EPA as Credible Source / Social Influencers as Credible Source / Celebrity as Credible Source) by 2 (Low Transparency vs. High Transparency) factorial design (Figure 2). Each participant was randomly assigned to one of the eight conditions in the online questionnaire on the Qualtrics survey platform. (Line 244 - 247)

(3) The abstract does not reflect the content very well

Thank you for the comment. We revised the abstract accordingly to reflect the study content better. (Line 24 - 25)

apart from these comments, the article is fine.

Thank you for your insightful suggestions that have helped us to improve the paper.

(1) the paper title needs to be revised to emphasis on the theoretical framework (i.e., SOR theory)

Thanks for your comments. We are revising the title as below:

The Influence of Sustainable Positioning on eWOM and Brand Loyalty: Analysis of Credible Sources and Transparency Practices by Apparel Brands based on the SOR model.

(2) Page 1, Line 34-35: “Gen Zers, born between 1997 and 2012 (Dimock, 2019)” may not be scientific. In fact, Gen Z is described the age length between 1995 and 2009 in many other papers. Please cross-check it.

Thank you for your comment. We recognize that there are different definitions of the age length of Gen Z in papers. In this study, we define Gen Zers, who were born from 1997 to 2012 based on a Pew Research Report (Dimock, 2019). Moreover, we added some more references from the literature to stronger the reference: (Coman et al., 2022; Goldring & Azab, 2020)

Coman, I. A., Yuan, S., & Tsai, J.-Y. (2022). Toward an audience-centric framework of corporate social advocacy strategy: An exploratory study of young consumers from generation Z. Sustainability, 14(7), 4099. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU14074099

Goldring, D., & Azab, C. (2021). New rules of social media shopping: Personality differences of U.S. Gen Z versus Gen X market mavens. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 20(4), 884–897. https://doi.org/10.1002/CB.1893

(3) Page 2, Line 70-91: the section of “1.1. theoretical framework: S-O-R model” should be adjusted to the section of “2. Literature Review”.  And Figure 1 should be placed into the last position of the section of “2. Literature Review”.

Thank you. We have revised the manuscript accordingly based on your suggestion.

(4) Why use SOR theoretical framework to explore the influence of credible source on eWOM/ brand loyalty?  There is a very important and new literature should be included in the next revision. For example,

 Qiu, H.; Wang, X.; Wu, M.-Y.; Wei, W.; Morrison, A.M.; Kelly, C. The Effect of Destination Source Credibility on Tourist Environmentally Responsible Behavior: An Application of Stimulus-Organism-Response Theory. J. Sustain. Tour. 2022, 1–21.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2022.2067167

The above literature employed SOR theory and found that destination source credibility is vital predictor of place attachment. This literature can be used to support your critical viewpoint that credible source is an important antecedent of place attachment.

Thanks a lot for your insightful suggestion. We included the reference. Moreover, we have added some other references as below:

“By utilizing the S-O-R framework, several studies found credible sources and transparency had a positive impact on attachment and trust (Deng & Yang, 2022; Ghosh & Bhattacharya, 2022; Qiu et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2019; Tuncer, 2021).” (Line 89-92)

With these findings, we experimented credible sources and transparency on brand attachment and trust. Moreover, we added brand identification as it is considered an important predictor of brand loyalty (Diallo et al., 2020)

(5) Why choose brand attachment, trust and identification as the organism (i.e., the meditors) ?  It is widely admitted that attachment, trust and identification belong to relationship quality. Relationship quality theory can be introduced in the revision.  Please include more recent literature of relationship quality in the following version. Here is one by Zheng et al. (2022).

Zheng, W.; Qiu, H.; Morrison, A.M.; Wei, W.; Zhang, X. Rural and Urban Land Tourism and Destination Image: A Dual-Case Study Approach Examining Energy-Saving Behavior and Loyalty. Land 2022, 11, 146.

Zheng et al. (2022) used relationship quality to explore the influence of relationship quality on loyalty. This literature can be a potential strong support for the authors’ key hypothesis.

Thanks a lot for your suggestions.

We included as below in the manuscript:

“Additionally, previous studies found that attachment, trust, and identification were elements of relationship quality (Alves et al., 2019; Huangfu et al., 2022; Jambon & Malti, 2022). Furthermore, relationship quality can have a positive impact on eWOM (Delafrooz et al., 2018; Sohaib et al., 2018).” (Line 213-217)

“Moreover, Zheng et al. (2022) revealed loyalty can be attained by improving relationship quality.” (Line 232-233)

(6) Page 7, Line 243: research instrument should be listed in the table to improve the face validity and readability

Thank you. We added Table 3 to the manuscript.

(7) In all, the literature cited in this paper is relatively old. In fact, several relevant literature should be cited to show this paper’s scientificity.

Thanks for your comments. We have added new 30 citations from the year 2018 to 2022 as per your suggestions. Thanks again.

(8) the literature format should be adjusted to meet the journal’s (i.e., sustainability) requirement.

Thanks. We have followed the format to revise our paper in this revision.

Good fires draft, come on!  Good luck!

Thank you for your kind words. We appreciate your insightful suggestions that have helped us to improve this paper.