Consumer Behavior in the Service Industry: An Integrative Literature Review and Research Agenda
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript is a review not an original article. It is overall not so clear. The title is focused on the specific topic of the article but it is too long.
Method p. 3: is it really a methodology? The data are poorly structured. The methodology is not explained e.g. figure 1 p. 4 . Please the authors use more tables or figures to explain some pieces of text.
Conclusion are not useful to article. they are generic.
The English is also not very clear sometimes.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The article in question is a review of the literature on the general theme the trends in consumer behavior in various geographic and service settings.
The methodology chosen by the authors for the selection of the works to be analyzed is that of the Integrative Literature Review.
Once the methodology and selection criteria have been accepted, the article works diligently and certainly offers scholars of the themes of this research field a useful tool to be able to navigate profitably.
So overall, in my opinion, the article achieves its objectives and does not require profound changes. I make these observations:
- the paper lacks any consideration on the limits of the work: at least in the conclusions the limitations should be reported by the authors;
- I think it is useful to further clarify the 'Search strategies used in Step 2', which led to a strong reduction of the papers from 5279 to 143, as well as to clarify how we have selected the 120 papers among the 143 identified.
The biggest problem, however, is related to how the paper relates to the issues of the magazine that should host it: in fact, clear references to sustainability are totally lacking, which we know is a broad criterion that can also be appropriately applied to many of the issues touched upon by the review presented. in the paper.
On this specific point, the authors will have to make an effort to include in the abstract and / or in the introduction and / or in the conclusions some appropriate reference to the criterion of sustainability.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Interesting work, but I don't see the connection with sustainability.
The choice fo the expression consumer behavior in the service sector for researching the papers, limits a lot of important outputs. Using: Consumer behavior + service sector could give outputs related to the review.
There is no literature review that supports the choice of the words / sentences to develop the research. The importante of that analysis and discussing the GAP comparing to other literature review should be explained.
The authors indicate many other methods but they don't explain why they have chosen Integrative literature review. Why is the more adequate to reach their research goal?
Why did the authors included 'factor of influence' to narrow the research? Why did they use 'modelo fo consumer behavior in service sector' to narrow their research?
A table which summarizes the results per sector could add value to the research. For example, the entire paragraph about Brand influence doesn't show any connection with different geographic areas and different activity sectores. Therefore, it is not clear how these variables are connected.
Figure 2 doesn't add any value as data was included in table 2. Comparison of these by country and sector would add more value.
Connection between section 3 and 4 is not clear. Why do the authors go from construct analysis to factors identification?
By these being stated, the title may be improved, as it doesn't reflect completely what has been researched. diverse geographic settings and sectors may be to broad.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you for incorporating the suggestions in your final paper. I believe it adequate to publish.
