The Role of Smart Travel Service in Intercity Travel Satisfaction: Does Traveler Heterogeneity Matter?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper is well-composed and contributes significantly to the literature. However, several areas require attention to meet the standards required by the journal 'Sustainability':

1. The Discussion section needs to be expanded to explore additional dimensions more comprehensively.

2. The policy implications of your study require further elaboration to enhance the relevance and applicability of your findings.

3. The authors need to provide more detailed analysis on smart transportation options such as mobility hubs, micromobility, and shared mobility. The following articles may serve as useful references:

   • Hosseini, K., Stefaniec, A., O'Mahony, M., & Caulfield, B. (2023). Optimising shared electric mobility hubs: Insights from performance analysis and factors influencing riding demand. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 13, 101052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2023.101052
   • Hosseini, K., Choudhari, T. P., Stefaniec, A., O’Mahony, M., & Caulfield, B. (2024). E-bike to the future: Scalability, emission-saving, and eco-efficiency assessment of shared electric mobility hubs. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 133, 104275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2024.104275

4. Please use capital letters only for the first word in any phrase or sentence throughout the manuscript. For example, in Figure 1, the text should be: 'Research hypotheses.' This rule should be consistently applied across all tables and figures.

5. In Table 1, the terms 'Factor Loading,' 'C.R.,' and 'AVE' need definitions. The authors should clarify all abbreviations used in the manuscript.

Author Response

Thank you so much for your comments and please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper focuses on analyzing the role of smart travel services in enhancing the quality of intercity travel services, with a particular emphasis on how the attributes of these services affect travel satisfaction and the diversity of experiences among travelers.

According to my opinion, the paper requires considerable revision before it can be suitable for publication. Below are some issues that explain my opinion.

1. The authors should clarify the context of the discussion more thoroughly: What do they mean by Smart Travel Service and Intercity Travels? These terms appear from the title but, in my opinion, are not sufficiently defined in the text.

2. The introduction appears too vague in presenting the reasons for the research. What are the motivations behind it? What gap does it seek to address? Beyond the remainder of the paper, it is necessary to state the research question and the objectives of the presented research from the introduction.

3. The literature review contains appropriate references but is vague in defining the connection with the research. It should be clarified whether the research is a development of still incomplete areas, proposes a new approach to a problem already examined in other studies, or analyzes a real case (case study) using existing and known tools from the literature. In other words, the authors must better describe the need for the research and how it relates to the existing literature in the field beyond its content.

4. A formalization of the concept of satisfaction would be useful. In section 3, it is the central concept being measured, but its definition remains in the background even though the dimensions in which it is manifested are stated. From my perspective, some work is needed on this aspect.

5. Section 4, in my opinion, is insufficiently developed. How the survey was conducted and the potential respondents were selected is not sufficiently clear. The impact of the pandemic is mentioned regarding the method of administering the questionnaire, but what is the pandemic's impact on the respondents' answers? My concern is that responses on satisfaction with transport services provided during a lockdown context may be influenced by various perception aspects from the user and the service providers, triggered precisely by the pandemic restrictions. In my view, this aspect must be clarified by the authors in some way.

6. The presentation of the sample and the descriptive dimensions is poorly formalized. It is necessary to comprehensively indicate the segmentation characteristics of the respondents concerning their attributes.

7. Table 1 presents what should be the questionnaire questions, with responses given on a Likert scale from 1 to 5. Table 1 and the values indicated need to be explained better. It is necessary to provide an experimental distribution (through parameters of central tendency, dispersion, and shape) of the responses for each question.

8. Given these observations about the sample and its reliability and representativeness, in my opinion, the authors must also work on the presentation of the model, and especially on that of the results.

 

9. Additionally, in an article submitted to this journal, which deals with sustainability topics in a broad spectrum and from various angles, the topic of sustainability itself must always be considered and sufficiently expressed.

Author Response

Thank you so much for your comments and please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Author Response

Thank you so much for your comments and please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1) Through this paper, the authors aimed to understand the mechanism by which attributes of intelligent travel services affect travel satisfaction and potential heterogeneity among intercity travelers. Based on the information obtained from the Guanzhong Plain urban agglomeration survey, they conducted a latent class structural equation model to divide the samples into latent groups: "cold", "rational" and "enthusiastic". Following the results of the estimated model in the case of the three categories, the satisfaction of smart travel services is positively affected by the perceived quality of smart travel services, the satisfaction with the smart travel experience is positively affected by the perceived value of smart travel services and the satisfaction with the experience of smart travel has a significant impact on overall satisfaction in intercity travel. Among these results, only in the case of the "enthusiasts" category does the satisfaction of smart travel services have a significant impact on the satisfaction of the smart travel experience. And last but not least, this paper highlighted the importance of improving the quality of intelligent travel services and promoting the travel experience through intelligent travel services, but also proposing measures to improve intelligent travel services in the case of Guanzhong urban agglomeration for the various groups existing on that market.

2) The note of originality in the elaboration of the paper is evident with a structure presented in detail and clearly. A novel approach in the formulation of hypotheses, the collection of data through the travel survey carried out and their analysis, the presentation of the method and the results obtained.

3) To carry out the study, a statistical model (latent class SEM method) was used in order to carry out the necessary investigations regarding the heterogeneity of travelers, a model that lends itself very well to the field addressed.

4) Regarding the results of the study, they are relevant and consistent with the information presented in the presented methodology section, supported by the information in the tables and figures and from which the added value brought to the scientific literature in this investigated field can be appreciated, as well as the broad interest from those interested in consulting such an approach.

5) The conclusions give a synthesis of how this study was carried out, starting from the multidimensional indicators used, conceptual models and research hypotheses in order to explore the impact mechanism of smart intercity travel satisfaction through the two paths: service quality and travel experience intelligence. From the results obtained based on the latent class model, the positive impact of the perceived quality of smart travel services on the satisfaction of smart travel services and the perceived value of the smart travel service on the satisfaction of the smart travel experience was identified for each group. With all the limitations inherent in a study, this paper systematically and comprehensively analyzed the heterogeneous characteristics of smart travel and the impact on intercity travel satisfaction, both from a theoretical and applied point of view. It is also proposed that for future research, the methods used can be applied to other regions of China to form the basis for improving smart travel services. Therefore the content of this section is consistent with the evidence and arguments presented.

6) The bibliographic references consulted are rich, up-to-date and relevant to the topic addressed by this paper regarding how the smart travel service influences the satisfaction of intercity travel.

7) The tables and figures presented in the paper are adequate, contain correct data resulting from calculations and are easy to interpret and understand.

 

Author Response

Thank you so much for your comments and please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I recommend acceptance.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks to the authors for the revised versione of their paper. All my comments have been thoroughly reviewed, and I also agree with the revised version of the title. The manuscript has been improved to warrant publication.