Mapping the Terrain of Open Innovation in Consumer Research: Insights and Directions from Bibliometrics

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

the following minor revisions are recommended:

1. include a data availability statement: adding a statement about the availability of data will improve the transparency and reproducibility of the study.

2. detailed captions for figures and tables: ensure all visual elements are well-explained and referenced within the text for better reader comprehension

3. expand practical implications: discuss more on how the findings can be practically applied by practitioners in the fields of open innovation and consumer research

4. acknowledge limitations: including a discussion on the study`s limitations will provide a balanced view and highlight areas for further research

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

proofreading: ensure the manuscript is free of gramatical errors and clearly written. Consider professional proof reading for non-native English.

Author Response

Reviewer 1:

 

Thank you very much for your kindly recommendation. We agree on your recommendations by revising all comments:

 

Comments 1: include a data availability statement: adding a statement about the availability of data will improve the transparency and reproducibility of the study.
Responds 1: Thank you very much for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have added at the end of this paper (P.22) “Data Availability Statement: Data sharing does not apply to this article as no new data were generated or analyzed. However, relevant information supporting the study's findings is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.”

Comments 2: detailed captions for figures and tables: ensure all visual elements are well-explained and referenced within the text for better reader comprehension.

Responds 2: Thank you very much for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have revised by following this suggestion. Upon review by the authors, it was found necessary to insert references to (fig. 2) and (fig. 3) into relevant sections of the text. These references were added in the sentences located at lines 212 (P.5) and 216 (P.6) respectively. All other figures and tables have been adequately explained.

 

Comments 3: expand practical implications: discuss more on how the findings can be practically applied by practitioners in the fields of open innovation and consumer research

Responds 3: Thank you very much for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have added: “For practitioners, the findings underscore the importance of aligning OI strategies with organizational goals and addressing challenges in areas such as intellectual property, scalability, and ethics. Focusing on neglected domains such as ecosystem development and risk management can enhance practical applications of OI principles, fostering collaboration and innovation within diverse disciplinary boundaries.”  in Line 646-650 (P.18).

Comments 4: acknowledge limitations: including a discussion on the study`s limitations will provide a balanced view and highlight areas for further research

Responds 4: Thank you very much for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have added: “Acknowledging limitations of the analysis tool used, Pro Word Cloud provides qualitative visual data but lacks detailed quantitative analysis, potentially skewing emphasis towards frequently used words over less common yet significant terms. Supplementing with another tool for confirmation may be necessary. Our analysis includes 184 documents, some of which are non-English papers, suggesting the potential benefit of adding additional databases to enhance the depth and inclusiveness of network analyses for more meaningful and robust insights into the research field.” Line 639-645 (P.18).

Comments: Comments on the Quality of English Language proofreading: ensure the manuscript is free of gramatical errors and clearly written. Consider professional proof reading for non-native English.

Responds: 1^st Version manuscript proofreading by Journal editing service

2^nd Version current manuscript proofreading by Grammarly application (only revise parts)

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

While the focus of the paper is on OI and consumer research, the authors should still mark that collaboration, knowledge sharing, and cross-disciplinary cooperation happen within all relations between a firm and its stakeholders. It  would suffice to insert an explanatory reference which would highlight that, e.g., supplier management is another field where OI leads to improvements on both ends. That could be done, for instance, in the context of Table 5. This cross-referring would merit a minor revision from which the paper would gain even more validity. 

Author Response

Reviewer 2:

 

Thank you very much for your kindly recommendation. We agree on your recommendations by revising all comments:

 

Comments 1: While the focus of the paper is on OI and consumer research, the authors should still mark that collaboration, knowledge sharing, and cross-disciplinary cooperation happen within all relations between a firm and its stakeholders. It would suffice to insert an explanatory reference which would highlight that, e.g., supplier management is another field where OI leads to improvements on both ends. That could be done, for instance, in the context of Table 5. This cross-referring would merit a minor revision from which the paper would gain even more validity.

Responds 1: Thank you very much for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have revised by following this suggestion. “Collaboration, sharing of knowledge, and interdisciplinary cooperation occur in every interaction between a company and its stakeholders.” in Line 581-582 (P.17).

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article presents a bibliometric study conducted using standard methods for this field. The authors identified the most cited articles in journals on the topic with the highest ratings. The authors answered Questions 1 and 2 of the study. However, the answers to Questions 3 and 4 remained insufficiently disclosed. The authors disclosed the interactions between keywords for finding publications, but not the topic of consumer behavior itself. The statistical methods of network analysis used by the authors did not disclose the answers to Questions 2 and 3. Therefore, it remains unclear what contribution this work will make to scientific research.

Author Response

Reviewer 3:

 

Thank you very much for your kindly recommendation. We agree on your recommendations by revising all comments:

 

Comments 1: The article presents a bibliometric study conducted using standard methods for this field. The authors identified the most cited articles in journals on the topic with the highest ratings. The authors answered Questions 1 and 2 of the study. However, the answers to Questions 3 and 4 remained insufficiently disclosed. The authors disclosed the interactions between keywords for finding publications, but not the topic of consumer behavior itself. The statistical methods of network analysis used by the authors did not disclose the answers to Questions 2 and 3. Therefore, it remains unclear what contribution this work will make to scientific research.

Responds 1: Thank you very much for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have revised by following this suggestion.

Research question 1 will be addressed in section 5.1, research question 2 will be answered in section 5.2, and research question 3 will be discussed in section 5.3, respectively.

Added line 528-546 (P.15-16)

“The bibliometric analysis of the bibliographic data reveals that research trends are increasingly focused on sustainability, the green economy, the life cycle, and COVID-19, among other topics. Sustainability has been gaining importance since 2010 (Wolfert et al., 2010), with a significant increase in studies related to this keyword after the COVID-19 pandemic in 2019. The peak of publications occurred in 2021, primarily focusing on sustainability, open innovation (OI), and consumer behavior within the agri-food sector. These studies highlight sustainability as a competitive advantage, driven by rising consumer demand for economic, environmental, and social responsi-bility. Open innovation and crowdfunding platforms are emerging as valuable tools to address these challenges. The role of bioplastics in packaging and textiles is empha-sized for their sustainability benefits. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) must in-tegrate technology and market adaptation to remain sustainable. The social implica-tions of technological innovation, especially disruptive innovation, are critical for sus-tainable development. The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the need for early stakeholder integration in sustainability projects, increased skepticism toward corpo-rate social responsibility (CSR) efforts, and emphasized the importance of broad stakeholder engagement. This multidisciplinary approach demonstrates the necessity for businesses to adopt holistic strategies integrating technological advancements, stakeholder engagement, and sustainable practices. Therefore, this study contributes to the belief that future research on Open Innovation and Consumers will increasingly relate to sustainability. Furthermore, the collaboration network analysis of researchers indicates a growing trend in Chinese studies on open innovation and consumers over the past 4 years, focusing on business models, commerce, and buying behavior. This study recommends exploring other dimensions of Open Innovation that have not yet been extensively studied.”