Slow Fashion Trends: Are Consumers Willing to Change Their Shopping Behavior to Become More Sustainable?
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is interesting and corresponds to the topic of the special edition. The statistics are very simple, but they presented the results they wanted to get and prove the hypothesis. They gave general information about the fashion industry and current issues. Very clear research conducted according to an adequate questionnaire. Results and discussion are very scarce. The literature is adequate. I propose to expand the research, emphasizing the greater importance for the fashion industry, society and science. List some more characteristics of the significance of this research. ANOVA technique has been done, but more discussion is needed regarding the obtained research results, and even add research by other authors on similar issues. Make a comparison with their similar results. There is no extensive discussion anywhere. It is even suggested that they conduct a comparative analysis with similar research through discussion. What is the significance of their research, if we do not have parameters. Explain the methodology and questionnaire more specifically. Whether it was taken over or modified, and whether it was designed independently. Expand the concluding considerations.
Author Response
Please check the file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper's aim corresponds to Journal areas. It would be better if the authors' decsribes the benefits of ANOVA. Why this method was chosen. What type, one or two way test? Besides, it would be better to identify the discussion, not only conclusion.
As recomendation, it would be better to avoid using the personnal sentences (we, our...)
Author Response
Please check the file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
With sustainability being such an important issue, especially in fashion, I fully support all research that provides us with deeper understanding of the topic. There is merit in the research questions, but there are some issues with the content of this paper. Please see my comments below and I hope these will be taken in the constructive manner they are intended
First the title needs revision …maybe Slow fashion trends: are consumers willing to change their shopping behavior to become more sustainable? I think this would read better.
The paper attempts to tackle a central concern for fashion and sustainability, namely shopping behaviour of sustainably orientated consumers. However, there are some issues with the terms that are used in the framing of the study. The paper needs to begin with some really clear definitions that make evident how the terms 'slow' / 'fast fashion' and 'linear' / 'circular' models and processes in fashion are being used and understood here. There are a number of areas where the idea of slow fashion and circularity are conflated – and this is not correct. I’m not sure if this something that has occurred in translating ideas into English language?? Slow fashion can be produced and consumed via linear systems (just a much slower version than linear models in fast fashion) and similarly some fast fashion has been produced using circular (with raw materials reclaimed from garments to be used in recycling). It is essential for the authors to clarify the language used in this research. There may be some benefit in revisiting the surveys to see if the results could help understand consumer perceptions of 'slow' fashion OR 'circularity'.
Section 2 is really muddled and I struggle to understand who was surveyed and what they were asked in the survey underpinning the findings. This section really needs further development and clarity. I’m also really unclear about how results section allows the authors to write the conclusion of this paper. The paper would benefit from a ‘Discussion’ sub-heading / section where the authors put forward a substantive discussion that unpacks their findings and the implications of this study, that helps the reader understand how conclusions have been made. In its current state, I’m really struggling to make sense of how the data has been interpreted in the findings.
Author Response
Please check the file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
It would be better to use Academic English to avoid personal sentences: we, our, and etc.
Author Response
Find attached the updated version.
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have addressed my previous concerns regarding title, definitions of the terminology around fast / slow fashion and linear / circular models for fashion.
In addition, further elaboration and the structural changes that have been made to the paper have improved the articulation of the purpose, methods used and findings of this research. Overall, the revised version of the paper provides a logical and informative read.
Author Response
Find attached the updated version.
