Modeling the Antecedents of Green Consumption Values to Promote the Green Attitude
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article deals with the current topic. The research question is established.
Reminders:
1) Revise abstract with clarity of information related to objectives.
2) I don't understand why 86% of the research population is men, when the majority of foods are bought by women? Don't you think this sample distribution biases the results of the research? What is the reason for this distribution? The same applies to the age distribution of the sample. I don't think you can consider your goal accomplished in that sample distribution. Consider narrowing your goal.
3) Complete limitation of research.
4) I propose to separate the theoretical and practical implications from the Conclusion and rewrite the Conclusion.
5) Complete the quotation at source 33 and 52
Author Response
see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The article can be publishable, but it needs to be improved. As a reviewer some suggestions will be provided:
1.Introduction
The author is clear in the introduction about theresearch objective he sets out to achieve. The introduction section must be reorganized and reinforced. There are several repetitions and mixture that difficult reading and understanding. First, it is needed a better contextualization of green consumption values issueswith previous literature treating this topic from this contextualization. It is necessary to justify in researchgap that the paper wants to void in light of the current literature in this field. Research objectives should be well exposed based on the previous studies. Finally, a number of potential research contributions to theory or practices must be well identified.
2.Literature review and hypotheses development
Section 2.3 theoretical integration is well defined. However, theoretical integration is suggested to focus on the specific theory application. The author(s) intend to address this research framework and research hypotheses development through sections 2.1 to 2.6. These sections made more specific, as it is clear how it is research developed and these research hypotheses have beendealing specifically with the theoretical framework.
3.Research Methods
The research design is well designed. However, please describe a few specific data collection procedure.The empirical study fails to report on the mean value and standard deviation of the questionnaire items. Please provide the table in details.
4. Findings
The result section is well presented and explained. There is a detailed explanation of the measurement and structural models’ indicators and how these indicators are related with the acceptation or rejection of the hypotheses. However, the research should discuss the results in details in the Figure 3 and Table 4. Please improve this.
5. Discussion
The discussion section is in some point scarce. I think there is a room to explain findings considering the current state of the literature. It should include not only the main discussions obtained in the light of empirical results but an advanced discussion of these findings and how they are related to past research. Indeed, there is not a single reference to the literature, their results and how those findings are regarding to the study.
The author(s) should describe the theoretical and managerial implications for the research for extensive argument.
6. Conclusion
Well done.
Minor editing for English.
Author Response
see the attachement
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
It was pleasure to review your paper. I believe the following edits will improve your paper for acceptance.
I would encourage you to rethink the title of the paper to be more descriptive of the research conducted.
Green consumption is a commonly researched phenomenon. It would be beneficial to further justify to newness and novelty of your study in the introduction. What is new in this paper? What is the significant contribution of this paper? It is necessary to clearly highlight the contribution of the paper in the introduction section, but authors do not indicate their contribution and how this paper adds value and knowledge to current literature. For example, focusing on the pro-environmental and pro-social elements or the focus on location of Bangladesh.
Also, consider breaking up your introduction into clear paragraphs.
Please define both green consumption values and attitudes to for the reader to fully understand the difference between the two variables. In addition, please provide more detail in hypothesizing the relationship between the two.
Was the survey online or on paper?
Table 3 is difficult to read. Please rework into different tables to better understanding (i.e., CR, AVE, SD, and Mean; there is no way to know what variables these relate to).
Please rephrase lines 258-261, it is a bit confusing.
Regarding the discussion of the results, to me they are too simple and intuitive. Conclusions only replicate previous results. What are the contributions of your findings?
Please conduct a thorough edit throughout. There are many formatting and grammar issues.
Author Response
see the attachement
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper replies to the reviewers' comments completely. The paper is accepted after minor change if it has another comments.
English copyeditig is required for readablity.
Author Response
see the attachedment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you for reviewing the comments and making the corrections in the manuscript. My only concern is still the layout of Table 3. Please consider reworking for better readability.
Minor edits are needed throughout.
Author Response
See the attachedment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
