How Does Enterprise Digital Transformation Affect Total Factor Productivity? Based on the Information Intermediary Role of Analysts’ Attention

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

A review on the revised manuscript in journal Sustainability entitled „How Does Enterprise Digital Transformation Affect Total Factor Productivity? Based on the information intermediary role of analysts' attention“

The article analyzes the data of Chinese A-share listed companies from 2012 to 2021 using the signaling theory and constructs a Mediating Effect Model, paying attention to the effect and mechanism of digital transformations on Total Factor Productivity from the perspective of information intermediary that analysts attention.

Broad comments

The article uses several statistical tests. Unfortunately, the article lacks information on what requirements the data to be analyzed must satisfy in order to use these tests and what methods have been used to verify it. The Sobel test is basically a specialized t test. The t-test assumes that the sample data come from a normally distributed population. If the data is not distributed normally, standard deviation, dispersion, etc. will not have real content. Unfortunately, the frequency distributions of the analyzed data are not discussed in the article, which reduces the reliability of the presented results.

Academic writing should be objective. If it is subjective or emotional, it will lose persuasiveness and may be regarded as relying on emotion rather than building a reasonable argument based on evidence. The language or informal writing should therefore be impersonal, and should not include personal pronouns. For most subject areas the writing is expected to be objective. For this the first person (I, we, me, my, etc.) should be avoided. In this article on line 79 is written “we study”, on line 407 is written “we select”, on line 439 is written “We substitute”, on line 509 is written “we have” and on line 521 is written “we found”. Eliminating personal pronouns from writing is highly recommend.

The article needs a major technical corrections.

Specific comment

When referring to sources, unfortunately, in all cases there is a missing space in front of the reference entry [xx] (73 entries).

Equations (lines 269, 280, 282, 291) must be fully created using the Equation Editor. The equations must be centered and the equations numbers aligned to the right.

Lines 207 and 252 do not have a period at the end of the sentence.

Lines 314, 318, 325, 379, 407, 408 and 409 have no space before the parenthesis "(".

The title of Table 5 and Table 6 does not start with a capital letter.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. We have made revisions to the paper according to your suggestions and hope to obtain your approval. The attachment contains specific information about our point-to-point response.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. Revise the line 14 to 16, it does not make any sense to understand. Moreover, abstarct is not well-written. Abstarct must contain brief introduction, followed by probelm statement, results, conclusion and future recommendations. Please revise it accordingly.

2. In line 78, "Chinese A-share listed companies from 2012 to 2021 as samples.........." why the authors used to collect data from 2012 to 2021 any specific reason?

3.  In what parameters "4.3.1. The dependent variable" were selected? 

4. More explanation has been included in order to better under the "5.3.1. Lagging variable method".

5. Why the authors used the term "instrumental" in " Instrumental variable method". On what parameters the variables were selected.

6. Conclusion should be the last section of the manuscript instead of "7.4. Shortcomings and Prospects" . Please rearrange accordingly. 

7. Add section of practical implications of study.

8. The novelty of the research study is still questionable. How the current study is differ from previous ones. Add the reserch questions and problems on what bases the current study has been conducted. 

Best Regards

The language is understanble, however some of the grammer mistakes are still there. Need to proofread the manuscript by professionals and attach the proofread certificate.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions. We have made revisions to the paper according to your suggestions and hope to obtain your approval. The attachment contains specific information about our point-to-point response.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you very much for the opportunity. Kindly note the following issues which need to address before considering the manuscript for publication.

 

1.     Abstract 1st three lines must be punchy and represent the main issue. It looks very narrow and unable to justify the main issue, which needs to address

2.     The introduction section must start with the theoretical significance and contribution of this work rather than discussing digital economy. More, research objectives are unclear in introduction section “for current study, research objectives should be based on research questions”.

3.     Model building section is unclear. For example. Equation 3 “TFPi,t = γ0 +γ1DTi,t + γ2Mediatori,t + γ3Controli,t + Year + Ind +εi,t (3)” is not solved and need to solve further by putting equation 2 in equation 3. More, in equation 2, please use variable name (Analysts attention) rather than mediator word.

4.     In table 3: column 1, 2, 3, and 4 headings should be shows hypothetical relations.

5.     In analysis section: please provide full and partial mediating effect table for Analysts attention variable.

6.     In analysis section: The model fitness values are unclear

7.     In analysis section: the reliability and validity are missing, such as discriminant validity and convergent validity should mentioned before testing hypothetical relations.

8.     Theoretical and Practical implications need to write separately under discussion section. Conclusion section should be separate from discussion part.

 

 

Thank you very much for the opportunity. Kindly note the following issues which need to address before considering the manuscript for publication.

 

1.     Abstract 1st three lines must be punchy and represent the main issue. It looks very narrow and unable to justify the main issue, which needs to address

2.     The introduction section must start with the theoretical significance and contribution of this work rather than discussing digital economy. More, research objectives are unclear in introduction section “for current study, research objectives should be based on research questions”.

3.     Model building section is unclear. For example. Equation 3 “TFPi,t = γ0 +γ1DTi,t + γ2Mediatori,t + γ3Controli,t + Year + Ind +εi,t (3)” is not solved and need to solve further by putting equation 2 in equation 3. More, in equation 2, please use variable name (Analysts attention) rather than mediator word.

4.     In table 3: column 1, 2, 3, and 4 headings should be shows hypothetical relations.

5.     In analysis section: please provide full and partial mediating effect table for Analysts attention variable.

6.     In analysis section: The model fitness values are unclear

7.     In analysis section: the reliability and validity are missing, such as discriminant validity and convergent validity should mentioned before testing hypothetical relations.

8.     Theoretical and Practical implications need to write separately under discussion section. Conclusion section should be separate from discussion part.

 

 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. We have made revisions to the paper according to your suggestions and hope to obtain your approval. The attachment contains specific information about our point-to-point response.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

A review on the revised manuscript in journal Sustainability entitled „How Does Enterprise Digital Transformation Affect Total Factor Productivity? Based on the information intermediary role of analysts' attention“

The article analyzes the data of Chinese A-share listed companies from 2012 to 2021 using the signaling theory and constructs a Mediating Effect Model, paying attention to the effect and mechanism of digital transformations on Total Factor Productivity from the perspective of information intermediary that analysts attention.

Broad comments

The article has been significantly supplemented and corrected.

Research methods have been described at satisfactory level. The conclusions are based on analysis and are adequate.

Reviewer 2 Report

All the comments were addressed properly. Accepted