Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The voerall work is well structured, but there are some major changes needed, mainly in terms of literature and positioning.

1) The title could be improved (i.e. reduced in length): "Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model" is just a  possible suggestion

2) A more extended explanation of why selecting Airbnb as a case study should be provided. The existing motivation is still generic. (For instance, row 405: "given its popularity as the accommodation service sector")

3) Row 38 on: "consumers are MORE likely to use resources at a lower cost than purchasing goods in a shar-38 ing economy"

4) Row 71: "In online tourism businesses such as Airbnb", otherwise it is too general and may not be valid.

5) Row 71: "[22,25,26]", missing coma.

6) Rows 83-85: "Since Airbnb's accommodation purchase is conducted in P2P transaction, this could be a new form of transaction system for individuals’ decision-making". Please rewrite and express your thought more clearly.

7) Row 117: "they have since expanded to parking lots, islands, and public facilities" Please add some references.

8) Rows 118-155: This part on bike sharing is way too long and not centered enough on the manuscript subject. As a consequence, the positioning of the paper is weakened.

9) Row 160: is "perceived use" correct? Or should it be "perceived ease of use"

10) Rows 181-208: see point 8) above... not centered enough on the manuscript subject.

11) Please provide a more formal and explicitdefinition of "interactivity" in section 2.4.

12) Hypotheses should be positioned at the end of each corresponding sub-section in the literature review section (section n. 2).

13) Has any procedure related to ex ante and/or ex post Common Method Bias procedures been utilized? Please explain in detail. If not, please provides some measures.

14) The male-female ratio is unbalanced.

>70% of respondents are between 18 and 39 years old, only ca. 28% are older (40-60+).

There is a clear selection bias. Now, the only way to overcome this problem is to clearly recognize this limitation in the conclusion section, and to state that this work has limited generalizability.

Alternatively, author(s) should specify whether there is any pre-determined choice for this scenario due to any possible case study characteristics.

In any case, the bias remains and limitations to the results geenralizability should be clearly explicited: this paves the way to researcher(s) for future studies overcoming this selection bias limitation.

15)About methodology:

- No sufficient details on reliability and EFA have been provided: it seems that no Exploratory Factor Analysis has been performed. If not performed, please explain why? If performed, please report more details, like extraction type/procedure and rotation (e.g. Keeling K.B. (2000). A regression equation for determining the dimensionality of data. Multivariate Behav. Res. 35 (4), 457–468. ; Lautenschlager G.J., Lance C.E. and Flaherty V.L. (1989). Parallel analysis criteria: Revised equations for estimating the latent roots of random data correlation matrices. Educ.
Psychol. Measur. 49 (2), 339–345. ; Horn J.L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika 30, 179.).

- Row 329: pillar and/or more relevant methodological references are missing:

• for Cronbach Alphas:

De Vellis R.F. (1991). Scale Development. Theory and Applications. Sage, Newbury Park.

• for Confirmatory Factor Analysis:

Anderson J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two- step approach. Psychol. Bull. 103 (3), 411–423.

Bagozzi R.P. and Yi Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 16, 74–94.

Fornell C. and Larcker D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Market. Res. 18, 39–50.

Kim D.U. (2008). In: AMOS A to Z: Structural Equation Modeling for Writing Papers. Hakhyunsa, Paju.

Kim K. (2008). Analysis of structural equation model for the student pleasure travel market: Motivation, involvement, satisfaction, and destination loyalty. J. Travel Tourism Market. 24 (4), 297–313.

• for structural equation models indicators and tests:

Perri C., Giglio, C. and Corvello, V. (2020). Smart users for smart technologies: Investigating the intention to adopt
smart energy consumption behaviors. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 155:119991.

Author Response

Responses to Reviewers’ Comments

Title: Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model

Journal: Sustainability

Thank you for your comments on our manuscript, “Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model.” We know how long it takes to review and critique a paper, particularly when providing comments as thoughtful as the ones we received, and we have revised the paper accordingly. In this letter, we provide specific responses to the comments.

Reviewer

1. The title could be improved (i.e. reduced in length): "Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model" is just a possible suggestion

Response) We agree with the reviewer that the title should be changed. The title the reviewer suggested is quite appropriate and we appreciate this.

2. A more extended explanation of why selecting Airbnb as a case study should be provided. The existing motivation is still generic. (For instance, row 405: "given its popularity as the accommodation service sector")

Response) We appreciate your valuable opinion. We added a specific statement about the reason why we selected Airbnb as a research subject.

“Airbnb, which has achieved remarkable growth, still has high growth potential, and such p2p deals have become a trend in the shared accommodation and tourism industry.”

“The emergence and growth of the sharing economy platform are having a much influence on the overall tourism and hotel industry, bringing about changes in tourist travel behaviors and the tourism service environment [2,40]. Airbnb, the most representative platform in the field of tourism and hospitality, has more than 7 million accommodations in 100,000 cities in 220 countries, and the average daily number of passengers is more than 2 million in 2019 [19]. This shows that the platform industry has a huge impact on the tourism environment and is driving change.”

“Airbnb is considered as research subject in the ground that it is a representative plat-form for sharing accommodation and has brought about a significant change in the accommodation service sector.”

3. Row 38 on: "consumers are MORE likely to use resources at a lower cost than purchasing goods in a sharing economy"

Response) We appreciate for your valuable opinion. Reflecting the reviewer’s opinion, we added it.

4. Row 71: "In online tourism businesses such as Airbnb", otherwise it is too general and may not be valid.

Response) Reflecting the reviewer’s opinion, we added ‘tourism’.

5. Row 71: "[22,25,26]", missing coma.

Response) Thank you for your point. We revised it reflecting your point.

6. Rows 83-85: "Since Airbnb's accommodation purchase is conducted in P2P transaction, this could be a new form of transaction system for individuals’ decision-making". Please rewrite and express your thought more clearly.

Response) We appreciate your valuable opinion. Reflecting the reviewer’s opinion, we have improved clarity

“Since Airbnb's accommodation purchase is conducted in P2P transactions, this could be a new form of the transaction system. Thus, this new form of transaction may change the individual's decision-making process.”

7. Row 117: "they have since expanded to parking lots, islands, and public facilities" Please add some references.

Response) Perhaps there was a problem in the document editing process. We have revised all of the literature research 2.1.

8. Rows 118-155: This part on bike sharing is way too long and not centered enough on the manuscript subject. As a consequence, the positioning of the paper is weakened.

Response) We appreciate your valuable opinion. Perhaps there was a problem in the document editing process. We have replaced it with a more appropriate literature review.

“The sharing economy, noted as an alternative to overcome the global recession caused by the 2008 financial crisis, is an economic system based on collaborative consumption of sharing goods produced instead of owning goods [3,36]. In addition, sharing economy services have grown and spread rapidly based on web platforms and social commerce as information and communication technology (ICT) has made it easier to share information [4,9–12,37,38). Globally, sharing economy-related industries have grown at an annual rate of nearly 80 percent over the past five years since 2010, with market size of $15 billion in 2014 to $355 billion in 2025, a potential value increase of about 20 times [39]. The sharing economy has also brought about numerous changes in the tourism and hospitality industries [12,14–16]. The emergence and growth of the sharing economy platform are having a much influence on the overall tourism and hotel industry, bringing about changes in tourist travel behaviors and the tourism service environment [2,40]. Airbnb, the most representative platform in the field of tourism and hospitality, has more than 7 million accommodations in 100,000 cities in 220 countries, and the average daily number of passengers is more than 2 million in 2019 [19]. This shows that the platform industry has a huge impact on the tour-ism environment and is driving change.

Given the growth of Airbnb and its importance in the industry, related research is being actively conducted. For example, Edelman and Geradin (2015) studies suggested the need for new regulations as Airbnb is a new accommodation platform industry [21]. Yannopoulou et al. (2013) focused on Airbnb's brand strategy [20], whereas Neeser et al. (2015) demonstrated its impact on the hotel industry [21]. Moreover, Li et al. (2015) looked at the differences between professional and nonprofessional hosts and revealed the differences between these hosts in terms of sales and share, focusing on transactions made in Airbnb systems [10]. Ert et al. (2016) demonstrated the impact of photos of hosts on users' decisions and found that the trust felt in pictures of hosts affected individuals’ willingness to use [2]. Furthermore, So et al. (2018) studied factors such as motivation and attitude to predict the intention of using Airbnb [23]. In sum, various studies on Airbnb are under way, but many of them approached it from a psychological perspective, such as host and guest motivation and satisfaction [22,25,26]. Research on the attributes of the sharing platform is scant.”

9. Row 160: is "perceived use" correct? Or should it be "perceived ease of use"

Response) Thank you for your point. We reviewed the whole manuscript and revised the term.

“The TAM presupposes that the acceptance and use of new technologies is determined by two leading factors: perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness [38].”

10. Rows 181-208: see point 8) above... not centered enough on the manuscript subject.

Response) Sorry for the mistakes. We checked the whole form again.

11. Please provide a more formal and explicit definition of "interactivity" in section 2.4.

Response) We appreciate your point. We described a definition of interactivity based on prior academic research.

“Based on prior research, interactivity can be defined the degree of response from the platform to which the user is perceived.” 

12. Hypotheses should be positioned at the end of each corresponding sub-section in the literature review section (section n. 2).

Response) ‘Literature review’ and ‘research model and hypotheses’ were repositioned and hypotheses were derived based on prior research evidence for each paragraph.

13. Has any procedure related to ex ante and/or ex post Common Method Bias procedures been utilized? Please explain in detail. If not, please provides some measures.

Response) We acknowledge that we have failed to conduct a pilot survey due to time and financial issues. However, based on the results of the reliability and validity indicators, we do not believe that the state of the data can distort the analysis results. Moreover, measurements used are specified below in Table 4. This is as follow:

“NS1: I think there are many accommodations to choose in Airbnb. NS2: I believe that Airbnb has enough rooms. NS3: Accommodations provided by Airbnb are abundant. RN1: As far as I know, Airbnb has a lot of users. RN2: In the future, more people will use Airbnb. RN3: Airbnb has an extremely large user base. COM1: Various services (e.g., experience or activity program, etc.) are available at Airbnb. COM2: Various tour programs can be booked through Airbnb. COM3: Various support functions (sharing accommodation information or translation, etc.) are available in Airbnb. TWO1: Communication with host can be made conveniently through Airbnb. TWO2: I think Airbnb is trying to listen to the opinions of its users. TWO3: Airbnb offers a chance to talk to the host. AC1: I can see what I wanted to see in the Airbnb. AC2: In Airbnb, it is easy to find the information related to the accommodation that I am interested in. AC3: I can sort out the accommodation in-formation I want from Airbnb. SY1: I can obtain the information quickly from Airbnb. SY2: I can obtain the latest information from Airbnb. SY3: I can get the information I want right away. TR1: Airbnb is trustworthy. TR2: Airbnb is reliable for online booking. TR3: I trust Airbnb. EOU1: I think Airbnb is useful. EOU2: Airbnb helps me to accommodation reservations efficiently. EOU3: Airbnb makes it easier for the accommodation reservation. EOU4: Using Airbnb can increase the efficiency of reservation. EOU5: It is convenient to use the Airbnb. RU1: I think Airbnb is easy to use. RU2: It is easy to obtain information from Airbnb. RU3: The way of using Airbnb is understandable. RU4: The booking process in Airbnb is easy to understand. RI1: I want to use Airbnb again. RI2: I am thinking of using Airbnb first for future travel reservations. RI3: I intend to choose Airbnb in the next travel.”

14. The male-female ratio is unbalanced. >70% of respondents are between 18 and 39 years old, only ca. 28% are older (40-60+).

There is a clear selection bias. Now, the only way to overcome this problem is to clearly recognize this limitation in the conclusion section, and to state that this work has limited generalizability.

Alternatively, author(s) should specify whether there is any pre-determined choice for this scenario due to any possible case study characteristics.

In any case, the bias remains and limitations to the results geenralizability should be clearly explicited: this paves the way to researcher(s) for future studies overcoming this selection bias limitation.

Response) Thank you for your valuable opinion. It is thought that the platform will be actively used mainly by young people, but the reviewer's opinion is right. Therefore, this is specified in the limitation section of the study.

“And the fact that the demographic characteristics of the subjects do not appear to be somewhat evenly distributed is considered a potential limitation of this study and should be noted in generalization.”

15. About methodology: No sufficient details on reliability and EFA have been provided: it seems that no Exploratory Factor Analysis has been performed. If not performed, please explain why? If performed, please report more details, like extraction type/procedure and rotation

Response) Measurement scale exists for the variable, and the validity and reliability of these measurement scale has been verified based on prior studies. We applied the measurement scale without major modifications, so we do not consider the need for further exploratory factor analysis.

16. About methodology: Row 329: pillar and/or more relevant methodological references are missing:

Response) Thank you for your point. Reflecting the comment of the reviewer, we added relevant methodological references

If you have any further questions about our revisions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

Congratulations on the topic choice and the rigour of your methodology. I consider the article to be of real interest to the academic community. However, I have a few suggestions for its improvement.

I believe that the literature review could use more information related to Airbnb than to bike-sharing services. Please adjust the section 2.1.

Please restructure sections 2.2 to 2.5 since they seem inserted out of the blue there. To me, they would make more sense if they were introduced by your research intention or if the TAM model would fall under the methodology chapter.

Please expand the section of results and separate conclusions from it.

I wish you good look with your research and I am looking forward to more of it.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Responses to Reviewers’ Comments

Title: Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model

Journal: Sustainability

Thank you for your comments on our manuscript, “Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model.” We know how long it takes to review and critique a paper, particularly when providing comments as thoughtful as the ones we received, and we have revised the paper accordingly. In this letter, we provide specific responses to the comments.

Reviewer

1. I believe that the literature review could use more information related to Airbnb than to bike-sharing services. Please adjust the section 2.1.

Response) We appreciate your valuable opinion. Perhaps there was a problem in the document editing process. We have replaced it with a more appropriate literature review.

“The sharing economy, noted as an alternative to overcome the global recession caused by the 2008 financial crisis, is an economic system based on collaborative consumption of sharing goods produced instead of owning goods [3,36]. In addition, sharing economy services have grown and spread rapidly based on web platforms and social commerce as information and communication technology (ICT) has made it easier to share information [4,9–12,37,38). Globally, sharing economy-related industries have grown at an annual rate of nearly 80 percent over the past five years since 2010, with market size of $15 billion in 2014 to $355 billion in 2025, a potential value increase of about 20 times [39]. The sharing economy has also brought about numerous changes in the tourism and hospitality industries [12,14–16]. The emergence and growth of the sharing economy platform are having a much influence on the overall tourism and hotel industry, bringing about changes in tourist travel behaviors and the tourism service environment [2,40]. Airbnb, the most representative platform in the field of tourism and hospitality, has more than 7 million accommodations in 100,000 cities in 220 countries, and the average daily number of passengers is more than 2 million in 2019 [19]. This shows that the platform industry has a huge impact on the tour-ism environment and is driving change.

Given the growth of Airbnb and its importance in the industry, related research is being actively conducted. For example, Edelman and Geradin (2015) studies suggested the need for new regulations as Airbnb is a new accommodation platform industry [21]. Yannopoulou et al. (2013) focused on Airbnb's brand strategy [20], whereas Neeser et al. (2015) demonstrated its impact on the hotel industry [21]. Moreover, Li et al. (2015) looked at the differences between professional and nonprofessional hosts and revealed the differences between these hosts in terms of sales and share, focusing on transactions made in Airbnb systems [10]. Ert et al. (2016) demonstrated the impact of photos of hosts on users' decisions and found that the trust felt in pictures of hosts affected individuals’ willingness to use [2]. Furthermore, So et al. (2018) studied factors such as motivation and attitude to predict the intention of using Airbnb [23]. In sum, various studies on Airbnb are under way, but many of them approached it from a psychological perspective, such as host and guest motivation and satisfaction [22,25,26]. Research on the attributes of the sharing platform is scant.”

2. Please restructure sections 2.2 to 2.5 since they seem inserted out of the blue there. To me, they would make more sense if they were introduced by your research intention or if the TAM model would fall under the methodology chapter.

Response) By strengthening the description of the platform attributes in the introduction, we have made the connection with literature review section smoother. This is as follow:

“Along with security and trust, important platform attributes are network externalities and interactivity. Airbnb, which requires participation by both users and suppliers, is an important platform for participants and is affected by the size of the network participating in the platform. In addition, interactivity is typically directly linked to the experience of using the platform as an important element in the information and communication technology and online environment, thus being addressed as a key element in website and platform research [30-33].”

3. Please expand the section of results and separate conclusions from it.

Response) Reflecting the reviewer's comments, we changed the composition of the results and conclusions.

If you have any further questions about our revisions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Airbnb platform and the sharing economy represent interesting and constant fields of research, since the improvements are very important for the progress.

The Introduction section is incomplete.

First of all, at lines 65-66 the comparison between Marriott and Airbnb is, in my opinion, illogic. Valuable assessements are not based on quantitity, many other factors being more relevant, such as quality, standards, services, personnel, and so many others more.  

Lines 78-79.  I do not understand the meaning of the phrase: In order to investigate the intention to repurchase Airbnb’s sharing accommodation platform. Please explain. The same phrase is also repeated at lines 378-379.

You might answer to some questions to convince the reader about the opportunity to introduce the TAM model:

Which are the weaknesses of the Airbnb platform to support the new acceptance model?

Which are the main benefits of introducing the TAM model?

In the Literature Review section, subchapter 2.1 proposes the analysis of Airbnb platform. Instead, authors assess other types of service sharing: bycicles (lines 118-141), and also 142-155. Not even a phrase in this section is about Airbnb.

The Methodology section is clear, concise, well presented.

The same appreciations for the Conclusion section.

Author Response

Responses to Reviewers’ Comments

Title: Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model

Journal: Sustainability

Thank you for your comments on our manuscript, “Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model.” We know how long it takes to review and critique a paper, particularly when providing comments as thoughtful as the ones we received, and we have revised the paper accordingly. In this letter, we provide specific responses to the comments.

Reviewer

1. The Introduction section is incomplete.

Response) We agree with the reviewer that the content of the introduction would be insufficient. Therefore we reinforced the introduction. One of these parts is as follow:

“Along with security and trust, important platform attributes are network externalities and interactivity. Airbnb, which requires participation by both users and suppliers, is an important platform for participants and is affected by the size of the network participating in the platform. In addition, interactivity is typically directly linked to the experience of using the platform as an important element in the information and communication technology and online environment, thus being addressed as a key element in website and platform research [30-33].”

2. First of all, at lines 65-66 the comparison between Marriott and Airbnb is, in my opinion, illogic. Valuable assessements are not based on quantitity, many other factors being more relevant, such as quality, standards, services, personnel, and so many others more.

Response) Reflecting the comment of the reviewer, we deleted the context.

3. Lines 78-79. I do not understand the meaning of the phrase: In order to investigate the intention to repurchase Airbnb’s sharing accommodation platform. Please explain. The same phrase is also repeated at lines 378-379.

Response) Reflecting the reviewer’s opinion, we have improved clarity

“In order to investigate the intention to repurchase Airbnb accommodation, this re-search is supposed to adopt the theoretical framework of the technology acceptance model (TAM) as the theoretical underpinning.”

“In this study, structural equation model analysis was conducted by adopting the expanded TAM framework to test the causal relationship between platform attributes and intention to repurchase Airbnb accommodation [44].”

4. You might answer to some questions to convince the reader about the opportunity to introduce the TAM model:

Which are the weaknesses of the Airbnb platform to support the new acceptance model?

Response) Thank you for your point. Through this study, we add a fractional implication that can complement Airbnb's weaknesses.

“Many strategies need to be established to expand the size of platform participants. Specifically, since the platform requires the participation of room providers, enticing strategies are needed for suppliers, not just users. In addition, strategies such as presenting a statement on the size of the network in a visible place are needed to make individuals aware of the expansion of the size of participants and the scope of services.”

“Platforms should be configured in a way that users can easily and instantly obtain the information they want, such as information related to the authentication of the host, and so on. It is also a good idea to implement policies that actively accept feedback from users and to establish a system that actively communicates with users by utilizing AI.”

5. Which are the main benefits of introducing the TAM model?

Response) Reflecting the reviewer’s opinion, we further explain in the manuscript the benefits from the utilization of TAM theory.

“TAM is a theory where theoretical explanatory power has been proven in numerous empirical studies. TAM is one of the most influential theories in explaining the IT acceptance process at the individual level.”

“Since understanding and utilization of IT technologies is essential for shared accommodation transactions through platforms, it will be meaningful to use the theoretical framework of TAM to find out the intentions of behavior against Airbnb.”

6. In the Literature Review section, subchapter 2.1 proposes the analysis of Airbnb platform. Instead, authors assess other types of service sharing: bycicles (lines 118-141), and also 142-155. Not even a phrase in this section is about Airbnb.

Response) We appreciate your valuable opinion. Perhaps there was a problem in the document editing process. We have replaced it with a more appropriate literature review.

“The sharing economy, noted as an alternative to overcome the global recession caused by the 2008 financial crisis, is an economic system based on collaborative consumption of sharing goods produced instead of owning goods [3,36]. In addition, sharing economy services have grown and spread rapidly based on web platforms and social commerce as information and communication technology (ICT) has made it easier to share information [4,9–12,37,38). Globally, sharing economy-related industries have grown at an annual rate of nearly 80 percent over the past five years since 2010, with market size of $15 billion in 2014 to $355 billion in 2025, a potential value increase of about 20 times [39]. The sharing economy has also brought about numerous changes in the tourism and hospitality industries [12,14–16]. The emergence and growth of the sharing economy platform are having a much influence on the overall tourism and hotel industry, bringing about changes in tourist travel behaviors and the tourism service environment [2,40]. Airbnb, the most representative platform in the field of tourism and hospitality, has more than 7 million accommodations in 100,000 cities in 220 countries, and the average daily number of passengers is more than 2 million in 2019 [19]. This shows that the platform industry has a huge impact on the tour-ism environment and is driving change.

Given the growth of Airbnb and its importance in the industry, related research is being actively conducted. For example, Edelman and Geradin (2015) studies suggested the need for new regulations as Airbnb is a new accommodation platform industry [21]. Yannopoulou et al. (2013) focused on Airbnb's brand strategy [20], whereas Neeser et al. (2015) demonstrated its impact on the hotel industry [21]. Moreover, Li et al. (2015) looked at the differences between professional and nonprofessional hosts and revealed the differences between these hosts in terms of sales and share, focusing on transactions made in Airbnb systems [10]. Ert et al. (2016) demonstrated the impact of photos of hosts on users' decisions and found that the trust felt in pictures of hosts affected individuals’ willingness to use [2]. Furthermore, So et al. (2018) studied factors such as motivation and attitude to predict the intention of using Airbnb [23]. In sum, various studies on Airbnb are under way, but many of them approached it from a psychological perspective, such as host and guest motivation and satisfaction [22,25,26]. Research on the attributes of the sharing platform is scant.”

If you have any further questions about our revisions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The changes included in the new version are sufficient to justify mansucript publication.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

I appreciate the present form of your article and also the changes made according to my remarks.