Determinants of Demand in Digital Platform-Mediated Service Work in Turkey: An Empirical Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper “Determinants of Demand in Digital Platform Mediated Service Work in Turkey: An Empirical Study” investigates the factors affecting the demand for digital platform-mediated services using the data set obtained from a comprehensive survey conducted by TUIK throughout Turkey. I have the following suggestions for the authors to improve the quality of their research. First, the abstract should clarify the research methodology adopted in the paper and highlight the primary implications of the study. Regarding the introduction, the novelty should be better highlighted. In addition, I suggest including a research question to clarify the objective of the study. As for the theoretical background, my suggestion is to clarify how the literature on the topic was reviewed to justify the research framework according to relevant theories in the body of literature. In fact, the authors should improve the theoretical justification of the study. Which is/are the theory/ies adopted to justify the study. I suggest improving the discussion of findings. The authors should improve the theoretical justification according to previous methodological contributions. Moreover, the author/s should describe more in details if and how their application converges or diverges from other approaches. As for the future contributions and implications, I suggest highlighting the potential role of sustainability and digital transition issues as a future research direction for the topic investigated (DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135665; DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2023.108824; DOI: 10.1109/TEM.2022.3212007). It should be highlighted, for example, that digital platforms could work as a sustainable transition catalyst, providing better environmental and social performance in addition to economic and financial outcomes. Finally, proofreading in different sections is needed.
Proofreading in different sections is needed.
Author Response
The following revisions are indicated in the attached word file.
- In the abstract, the research methodology has been clarified, and implications related to the results have been added.
- The introduction section provides a detailed theoretical rationale for the study and introduces a research question within this context. The novelty of the study in the literature is explained.
- The introduction section has elaborated on the theoretical rationale behind the study.
- Additionally, a discussion section has been created to develop the discussion.
- Both the introduction and literature review sections have been updated with the necessary explanations.
- Recommendations for future studies have been expanded upon. The entire study has been reviewed for language clarity and coherence.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors aims to determine the factors affecting the demand for digital platform mediated services. The study utilizes the Logit/Probit econometric model with a qualitative dependent variable. The results show that the income level of the individuals, the characteristics of the region where they live, and the familiarity of individuals with digital platforms significantly affect the demand for digital platform-mediated services.
In Table 1, the variables that are in a relationship with each other (p<alpha) among the qualitative variables according to the Chi-square results are clearly indicated. Binary Probit Model estimation results are given in Table 2. In this table, parameter expression should be revised as coefficients. Because the coefficients in the established model are estimators, not parameters. The pseudo-R-square value turned out to be very small. Statistics obtained other than this value show that the established model is good. Table 3 gives the marginal effects of the predicted binary probit model.
My comments are given below. I am also including my suggestions to improve the manuscript.
The results obtained should be further detailed in the abstract.
A paragraph describing what was done in the other chapters can be added at the end of the introduction.
In Table 2, parameter expression should be revised as coefficients. Because the coefficients in the established model are estimators, not parameters
The authors take almost half of the paper to present previous work. In general, the authors must improve the structure of the text. Moreover, notations are not well defined throughout the paper.
We recommend the development of the discussions. This is an important part of the paper that is rather underdeveloped. I recommend it should be further elaborated.
References should be cross checked from text and reference list and some relevant references from Sustainability may be added.
Author Response
The following revisions are indicated in the attached word file.
- The article has been reviewed and the text structure has been improved.
- In the abstract, the research methodology has been clarified, and implications related to the results have been added.
- Necessary explanations have been added to the end of the introduction section.
- Additionally, a discussion section has been created to develop the discussion.
- Necessary checks have been made by adding references on "Sustainability".
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript examines the factors affecting the demand for the digital platform mediated services using the data set obtained from a comprehensive survey conducted by Tüik throughout Turkey.
The paper is suitable for publication. It needs minor revision. Some points may be improved :
1) Abbreviations should be written in a long form where they are firstly seen. For example, TUIK...
2) Equation numbers should be aligned.
3) After Eq.(3), "where it is ..." may be better, and no need for an indent.
4) In the sentence after Eq.(5), what is xj ? That may be mentioned after Eq.(1). Similarly, (xi,yi) should be written with subindices as x_i, y_i.
5) In the beginning of Results, the size of the data is not understood. Further, meaning of columns in Tables might be explained. If there is simple mathematical formula for chi_p^2, it may be written.
6) Check the sentence in Page 8 between lines 334-338.
7) Abbreviations AIC ? BIC ? VIF ? TR regions ?
8) "psuedo" should be corrected as "pseudo".
9) In sentence in Page 11 between lines 371-374. According to which values in Table 2, "statistically significant" is written ?
Some minor errors.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
- Abbreviation explanations have been added.
- The equations have been aligned.
-
revisions were made to the text.
- Explanations about the letter notations in the equations are given. Corrections were made in the subscripts of the letters.
-
A paragraph has been added to the beginning of the results. The explanations regarding the columns in Table 1 are detailed in the section.
-
Necessary adjustments have been made in the lines with numbers.
-
Details of the abbreviations mentioned are given in the section where they are used for the first time.
- Necessary revisions have been made.
- The information that the variables are statistically significant according to the probability value of the z-test statistic is included in the text
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
I am pleased to review the article titled "Determinants of Demand in Digital Platform Mediated Service Work in Turkey: An Empirical Study,"
In this study authors presents a Despite claims that digital platform-mediated jobs may have negative consequences for the labor market, empirical evidence supports the existence of positive effects, especially for low- paid and low-skilled service jobs. Comparative studies on the characteristics, working conditions, and earnings of workers who perform these jobs on digital platforms are becoming widespread. However, there needs to be more literature regarding the demand side of digital platform-mediated service jobs. This study aims to determine the factors affecting the demand for digital platform- mediated services using the data set obtained from a comprehensive survey conducted by TUIKthroughout Turkey. The study uses the Logit/Probit econometric model with a qualitative depend- ent variable. The results show that the income level of the individuals, the characteristics of the region where they live, and the familiarity of individuals with digital platforms significantly affect the demand for digital platform-mediated services
.
The authors have effectively used headings, and subheadings to clearly present their findings and support their arguments. The paper flows logically, with a clear and concise introduction that motivates the problem, sufficient literature review, and a well-designed methodology section . Overall, the paper is a pleasure to read and effectively communicates the research to the audience.
· While the paper is well-written and well-organized, I have some constructive criticisms that I believe could strengthen the manuscript. Specifically, I suggest that the authors provide more detailed explanations for some of the methodology and model parameters used in the study.
· I noticed that the authors did not explicitly discuss the theoretical implications of their work.
· I found that the "future studies" part was relatively weak and could benefit from further elaboration. I believe that this section could be strengthened by providing more specific and detailed suggestions for future studies.
That said, I believe that these critiques can be addressed through revisions and that the paper has the potential to make a valuable contribution to the field.
Author Response
The following revisions are indicated in the attached word file:
- Necessary methodological explanations and information on parameters are included in the text.
- Additionally, a discussion section has been created to develop the discussion.
- More detailed recommendations have been added for future studies.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 5 Report
See my comments as attached
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Below are our answers for each revision in the file you sent. The relevant revisions are organized in the attached word file.
Introduction
Lines 26-29; 52-53…references
Response: Quotations have been added to the sentences in lines 26-29. The sentences in lines 52-53 are already related to the cited source Schmid (2017).
-it should be clear (1) The motivation of doing this study should be detailed explained in the introduction section. (2) Explains what we need to find out. (3) Explains briefly what this paper will do to find out, the method, etc.
Response: The necessary explanations have been added to the introduction section.
-The authors also should write and clearly research questions/hypothesis in this study
Response: A research question has been added to the introduction section.
Literature Review
It is best to summarize the gaps between existing papers at the end of the literature review. How this research comes to fully fill the gaps in knowledge should be clearly identified.
Response: An explanation has been added to the end of the literature review section regarding the unique aspect of the study and how it will fill the gap in the literature.
Digital Platforms Used For Gig Working in Turkey
What is the function of this section, I really don’t know. Why not just embed this section
into a particular section.
Response: It is believed that including this section as a separate heading will provide readers with an understanding of digital platforms in Turkey.
Data, Methodology and Findings
the section topic should be separate and changed to Material and Methods.
Response: the section topic should be separate and changed to Material and Methods.
-Lines 219-228 should give the website of the survey or at least it sources.
Response :References to the source of the dataset have been provided.
-lines 237-238….this problem have been solved by logit and probit models? Need further
justification and references/citation?
Response : The necessary reference has been provided.
-all Eqn’s should have a references/citation
-lines 270-271… “The probit model is more prevalent in econometrics than logit”… Need
further justification and references/citation?
Response: The necessary reference has been provided
-lines 272-273…”MLE can be used to find parameter estimates of logit and probType equation here.it models”…what are the method used to estimate the parameter? or in this study, MLE used to estimate the parameter of logit and probit models… corrected. Provided a few studies (reference/citation) using MLE to estimate the parameter of logit and probit models.
Response: The necessary reference has been provided
-What type of software is used for MLE to estimate the parameter of logit and probit?...need to mentioned?
Response : An explanation regarding the econometric software used in the study has been added in the data description section.
-lines 297-300… Need further justification and references/citation?
Response The necessary reference has been provided
-should mentioned all the model used in this study and its should synchronize with what are you mentioned in the results section…line 310, the Pearson correlation coefficients you didn’t mentioned but it appear at your 4.3 Results.
Response : The necessary revisions have been made.
4.3 Results
-change the title of this section to Results and discussion, instead of Data, Methodology and Findings
Response: The headings have been revised as follows: 5. Results, 6. Discussion,
Conclusion
line 310, the Pearson correlation coefficients should be mentioned clearly in the Section 4.
Response : The changes have been made to the Pearson correlation coefficients.
-Table 1…why used ?2, any reason for this? Due to Table 1, this table only based on Frequency (%), so what actually it’s function? The end of this table, you stated that ?2, is the probability value of the chi-square test statistic, what is it indicate and how it related to Table 1 title
Response : An explanation of why the chi-square test was used has been added to the manuscript.
-line 334, you mentioned “to the Pearson Chi-square relationship measure…”. In my opinion, you should explain (either), in form of three types of comparison: (1) goodness of fit, (2) homogeneity, and (3) independence.
-lines 334- 338, …you should be mentioned clearly in the form of either one from three types
of the above.
Response : An explanation of why the chi-square test was used has been added to the text.
-lines 320-330, write consistent and an accurate number of incomes as in Table 1, eg. …for individuals with 6001-7000 TL is 1.3% instead of 1% of individuals with 6001-7000 TL.
Response : The requested revision has been made in the manuscript.
-lines 337-338, should be clearly stated your hypothesis, instead of just mentioned statistically significant at various significance levels.
Response : The information regarding the significance of the parameters has been rearranged in the text.
-lines 344-349 especially in line 345, you used VIF to evaluate the multicollinearity problem between the independent variables of the predicted probit model. My question is what are the proposed of multicollinearity in this study? and what is the relationship between your study with the multicollinearity problem. Then in lines 346-349 you have the statement of no multicollinearity problem in the estimated model. In my opinion, you should clearly justify it’s function, rather than hanging them.
Response The information regarding multicollinearity has been elaborated in more detail.
-lines 354-356, what is the purpose of Pearson χ2 statistic? and you decided that there is no identification error in the estimated model. You should refer to my opinion above.
Response The purpose of using the Pearson chi-square test has been stated.
Discussion and Conclusion
The title of this section should be separated into two sections i.e., section 5. Discussion and Section 6. Conclusion.
Response : The headings have been revised as follows: 5. Results, 6. Discussion,
-In Section 5, the discussion should be supported by empirical results instead of just mentioned in general as in the text.
Response : Relevant explanations have been added to the discussion section.
-Since you have a probit and logit models (equations 3-5) as well as its results in the form of Tables (Table 1-3), you should also write a final models with its values.
In conclusion section, you should highlighted the future work for future study.
Response : Necessary additions have been made to the conclusion section.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
A Paper Ultimated Clearly and Correctly; Hereby I Accept the Contribution
Author Response
Thank you for your contributions.
Reviewer 2 Report
The specified corrections were made by the authors in detail and meticulously. The article is acceptable as it is.
Author Response
Thank you for your contributions.
Reviewer 5 Report
Yes, all corrections as suggested have been done by the author
Author Response
Thank you for your contributions.
