Digital transformation and liquidity creation in commercial banks: Evidence from the Chinese banking industry

Wen Wen; Ying Liang

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0318785

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionApril 22, 2024
22 Apr 2024 Author Response https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318785.r001
30 Jul 2024 Decision Letter - Islam Abdeljawad, Editor Dear Dr. wen, Comments from PLOS Editorial Office Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 13 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols . We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Islam Abdeljawad Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: "1.Shaanxi Provincial Department of Education Special Research Program project "Digital Finance and traditional finance Coupling Empower Shaanxi Provincial Rural Revitalization Strategy Development" (project No. : 23JK0247); 2.Xianyang Normal University Special Research Fund Project "Research on Digital Financial Resource Allocation Mechanism in the Upgrading of Industrial Structure in Shaanxi Province" (Project No. : XSYK22010)" Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?> Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??> The PLOS Data policy Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??> Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: No Reviewer #3: Yes ****** Reviewer #1: Please follow the attachment for making your paper ready for publication. this will make it a good contribution in the selected area, overall its good work. Case studies can provide invaluable insights into real-world examples of digital entrepreneurship. Consider including case studies that illustrate successful (and perhaps unsuccessful) digital ventures to enhance the paper’s practical relevance. Digital entrepreneurship is not limited by geographical boundaries. Including a discussion on how digital entrepreneurship differs across various regions and cultures could add depth to the paper. Reviewer #2: The subject is very interesting, and the database is recent, but the article cannot be published in its current form. Devoting 12 pages to the introduction is unjustifiable. I noticed much redundancy. In addition, the bibliographical references need to be updated. The discussion section should be linked to the theoretical part and highlight the implications of this study. The last heading should read ‘conclusion’ only. It's essential to thoroughly proofread your text to ensure it is free of grammatical or spelling errors, which can significantly enhance the readability and credibility of your work. Reviewer #3: Dear authors, It's my luck to review this paper, which focus on the digital transformation of commercial banks in China. It think this paper contribute greatly to the digital transformation process of commercial banks in emerging markets. The following constructive comments could be helpful for authors to develop the manuscript. 1. The introduction should mention the motivations to conduct this study in China, as prior studies such as Jiang Hai et al., 2023), Guo Ye et al., 2022), (Li Yifei et al., 2022) address the digital transformation index in China. What is the unique institutional characteristics about Liquidity creation and digital transformation in China? 2. The contribution needs citations and explain how this study extends prior studies in data, method and idea. 3. The literature should incorporate the theories that explain the nexus between digital transformation and liquidity creation. For example: Vuong, G. T. H., Phan, P. T. T., Nguyen, C. X., Nguyen, D. M., & Duong, K. D. (2023). Liquidity creation and bank risk-taking: Evidence from a transition market. Heliyon, 9(9). 4. The variable definitions should include variable definition tables to summary how authors calculate the variables. 5. In the baseline models, the authors employ the FEM method, how could the results are free from autocorrelation and heteroskedasticity issues? 6. Honestly, I loose my focus as the study incorporate so many objectives. It would be better for readers if the authors narrow down the focus and consolidate the content of the study. 7. The findings needs in-depth and economic discussion, rather than describe the tables. 8. There are many interesting results and the implications should closely linked with the main findings. I hope the comments would are helpful and good luck to your publications. ****** what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy Reviewer #1: Yes: Dr. Shujahat Ali Reviewer #2: No Reviewer #3: Yes: Khoa Dang Duong ******** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: review.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318785.r002
Revision 1
12 Sep 2024 Author Response Reviewer 2# Dear Editors and Reviewers: Thank you very much for taking your time to review and comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Digital transformation and liquidity creation in commercial banks: evidence from the Chinese banking industry” . Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction and point-by-point response which we hope meet with approval. Our responses are detailed below and highlighted in red. The main changes in the paper and the responds to the reviewer #2 are as follows: Q1: The subject is very interesting, and the database is recent, but the article cannot be published in its current form. Devoting 12 pages to the introduction is unjustifiable. I noticed much redundancy. In addition, the bibliographical references need to be updated. The discussion section should be linked to the theoretical part and highlight the implications of this study. Response: Indeed, the discussion on the limitations of the study was ignored. We have deleted some unnecessary phrases in the paper and modified some expressions in the paper. First, in the introduction part, the language is simplified, and the entry point is found directly through the existing problems. Second, we deleted some less relevant documents in Chapter 2 and added some new ones. “In recent years, the continuous integration of digital technology represented by big data, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence with the financial industry has reshaped and promoted the innovation of financial products and service models, resulting in major changes in the business behavior and structure of banks (Liu, 2016; Guo and Zhu, 2021). These changes have had a profound impact on the level of liquidity creation within banks and their impact on the real economy (Song et al., 2023).” （LINE169-174） “Meanwhile, liquidity creation is positively correlated with economic output and growth (Davydov et al., 2021), and the expansion of liquidity creation further promotes the growth of the real economy.” （LINE265-267） Third, to make the research question clearer, we re-adjusted the mechanism of action diagram. Q2: The last heading should read “conclusion” only. Response: Thanks for this great point. First, we have corrected the title of the last chapter. Secondly, we have revised the research recommendations in the last chapter. “First, the shortage of bank liquidity has hindered the transmission of monetary policy to a certain extent, and the digital transformation of banks can help improve the level of bank liquidity. Therefore, regulatory authorities should encourage commercial banks to promote the process of digital transformation and promote the deep integration of fintech, commercial banks and the real economy through policy support. (LINE 851-855) Secondly, it is considered that the digital transformation of banks can alleviate the liquidity shortage by optimizing loan loss provisions, improving risk tolerance and restraining financial disintermediation. Commercial banks should make use of digital technology to reconstruct financial logic and transform service mode to improve their risk resistance ability. At the same time, banks need to personalize customer service and develop new customers through digital means, to improve the internal power of banks' digital transformation to serve the real economy. (LINE 875-880) Finally, due to the heterogeneity of the effects of banking digitalization on liquidity creation, regulatory authorities should respond with differentiated measures.” (LINE 881-882) This letter is our point-by-point response to the comments raised by the reviews. The comments are produced and our responses are given directly afterward in a different color from the authors in the revised copy. We would also like to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised copy of the manuscript. We hope that the revised manuscript may address the concerns raised by the reviewers and will have the opportunity to be published in PLOS ONE. Response to Reviewer 3 Comments Dear Editors and Reviewers: Thank you very much for taking your time to review and comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Digital transformation and liquidity creation in commercial banks: evidence from the Chinese banking industry” . Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction and point-by-point response which we hope meet with approval. Our responses are detailed below and highlighted in red. The main changes in the paper and the responds to the reviewer #3 are as follows: Q1: The introduction should mention the motivations to conduct this study in China, as prior studies such as (Jiang Hai et al., 2023), (Guo Ye et al., 2022), (Li Yifei et al., 2022) address the digital transformation index in China. What are the unique institutional characteristics about Liquidity creation and digital transformation in China? Response: We thank reviewer for reminding us this important point. We add the liquidity problem faced by China's financial market, which is very different from that of other countries, to introduce the necessity of the integration of digital technology and traditional finance and the main issues studied in this paper. The details are as follows: “However, for a long time, China's real economy has been faced with financing difficulties and high financing costs, while the problem of idling arbitrage in the banking system still exists. In response to this problem, in recent years, the regulatory authorities have issued a few policies, such as making banks that meet the assessment requirements of inclusive finance enjoy a certain preferential deposit reserve ratio, reducing excess deposit reserves to release signals guiding credit expansion, etc. These measures have alleviated the shortage of funds in the real economy in the short term, but this problem has always been difficult to be substantively resolved.” (LINE 64-71) Q2: The contribution needs citations and explain how this study extends prior studies in data, method and idea. Response: Thank you very much for this comment. We have revised the innovation part of this paper as follows. “Firstly, existing literature has begun to pay attention to the impact of digital transformation of banks on banking operations and the real economy, but the investigation on this issue focuses on the asset side of banks. The index of bank liquidity creation is a comprehensive measure of the smooth conduction of liquidity through the banking system by the asset side and the liability side of the bank. Therefore, from the perspective of liquidity creation, it is more comprehensive to examine the issue that the digital transformation of banks can help improve the efficiency of banks to serve the real economy. Secondly, the existing literature on the connection between digital transformation and mobility creation needs to be supplemented, both theoretically and empirically. This paper focuses more comprehensively on the potential for banks' digital transformation to reduce or increase liquidity creation through multiple transmission channels. At the theoretical level, the paper makes a detailed analysis of how the digital transformation of banks affects liquidity creation, and at the same time, it makes a more detailed test of the internal relationship between the two through empirical research. Thirdly, considering that there are considerable differences in the development of different types of banks and different regional banks in China's banking system, based on the development status of Chinese banks, this paper reveals the impact of digital transformation on liquidity when banks face different external environments and different internal conditions. It provides reliable empirical evidence for banks to formulate digital transformation strategies in accordance with local conditions in China.” (LINE 114-132) Q3: The literature should incorporate the theories that explain the nexus between digital transformation and liquidity creation. For example: Vuong, G. T. H., Phan, P. T. T., Nguyen, C. X., Nguyen, D. M., & Duong, K. D. (2023). Liquidity creation and bank risk-taking: Evidence from a transition market. Heliyon, 9(9). Response: We sincerely appreciate the valuable comment. In the second chapter, literature review and research hypothesis are reviewed, and the relationship between digital transformation and bank liquidity creation is directly emphasized. Specifically as follows： “In recent years, the continuous integration of digital technology represented by big data, cloud computing and artificial intelligence with the financial industry has reshaped and promoted the innovation of financial products and service models, resulting in major changes in the business behavior and structure of banks (Liu, 2016; Guo and Zhu, 2021). These changes have had a profound impact on the level of liquidity creation within banks and their impact on the real economy (Song et al., 2023).” (LINE 164-169) Q4: The variable definitions should include variable definition tables to summary how authors calculate the variables. Response: Thanks for this comment. We added the measurement of variables in the descriptive statistics table to make the definition of variables more intuitive. At the same time, the profitability statistics are supplemented. Variable symbol Method of measurement Mean value Standard deviation Minimum value median Maximum value liquidity creation Lc Constructed according to the three-step cat-fat classification method proposed by Berger and Bouwman (2009) 54.345 17.421 24.078 51.436 192.160 Digitization of Banking Services Tdi Peking University Digital Transformation Index of Chinese commercial banks 52.137 38.468 0 52 200 Provision for loan losses Llp Loan loss reserve/total loans 0.033 0.937 0 0.051 0.152 Risk tolerance Risk Risk-weighted assets/total assets 0.587 5.342 0.223 0.649 0.915 Financial disintermediation Findis (regional corporate bonds + non-financial corporate stocks)/social financing scale 0.156 3,552 0.375 0.147 0.08 Industrial structure Ind Gross secondary industry product/Gross regional product 46.743 9.451 32.762 48.702 81.328 Business cycle M2 M2 growth rate 11.460 2.346 6.990 11.010 18.950 Level of regional economic development Gdpg Regional GDP growth rate 10.768 0.654 9.299 10.739 12.123 Non-performing loan ratio Npl Non-performing loans/total loans 1.627 0.764 0.049 1.214 4.376 Capital adequacy ratio Tcr Total capital/risk-weighted assets 13.449 3.135 0.018 12.771 57.610 Asset size Size Ln (Total assets) 25.674 1.529 22.391 25.395 31.138 Percentage of non-interest income Nir Non-interest income/operating income 34.216 10.159 0 33.315 206.077 Profitability Roe Net profit/net assets 15.172 6.383 0.813 13.624 32.469 Q5: In the baseline models, the authors employ the FEM method, how could the results are free from autocorrelation and heteroskedasticity issues? Response: Thanks for this comment. To control heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation problems, we Cluster all the standard errors of regression coefficients at the bank level. It is explained in P10. “To control for potential heteroscedasticity and serial correlation, all regression coefficients are clustered and have robust standard errors.” (LINE 460-461) Q6: Honestly, I loose my focus as the study incorporate so many objectives. It would be better for readers if the authors narrow down the focus and consolidate the content of the study. Response: Thanks for this great point. We have deleted some unnecessary phrases and other descriptions in the paper. For example, first, we simplify the language in the introduction and find the entry point directly through existing problems; (P2-5) Second, in the empirical results part, I asked to test the analysis part of each table and analyze the empirical results combined with the economic reality; (P21-36) Third, to make the research question clearer, we re-adjusted the mechanism of action diagram. Q7: The findings needs in-depth and economic discussion, rather than describe the tables. Response: Indeed, the discussion on the limitations of the study was ignored. In the table test analysis part of the empirical results, we analyze the empirical results combined with the economic reality to help understand the research problem in this paper. “Column (1) only considers the digital transformation of banks as a regression variable, and column (2) adds control variables. The results show that there is a significant positive correlation between digital transformation and liquidity creation, and indicates that the increase of bank liquidity creation is related to the process of digital transformation of banks. Our results are consistent with existing research demonstrating that the integration of digital technology and finance can help banks expand long-tail customers (Zhang and Naceur, 2019), increase loan volume (Sheng, 2021) and increase bank credit supply, thereby increasing bank liquidity creation. So, hypothesis 1 is tested.” (LINE 486-493) (LINE 64-71) “Due to the application of digital technology, commercial banks have improved the ability to monitor loan credit risks, improved the forward-looking provision for credit losses, and avoided excessive provision for loan losses to cushion risks.” (LINE 546-548) “This is due to the application of advanced technology in bank business activities, which effectively improves the information transparency of lending enterprises and reduces banks' concerns about unexpected risks. Therefore, under the premise of controllable risks, banks tend to obtain more interest spread returns by taking certain risks voluntarily, which is ultimately reflected in the increase of risk tolerance.” (LINE 565-569) “Because banks use digital technology to lower the threshold of financial services, expand loan services for small and micro enterprises, agriculture and vulnerable groups, ease the financing constraints of these groups, and promote the development of the real economy.” (LINE 586-589) “The possible reason is that in regions with perfect digital infrastructure, banks can take advantage of superior conditions to promote their own digital transformation, and advance the use of advanced technology to innovate financial products to enhance their competitiveness, thus promoting the creation of bank liquidity.” (LINE 718-721) “This suggests that the development of digital finance will weaken the positive relationship between the digital transformation of banks and the creation of liquidity, which may be because the development of digital finance, while improving the efficiency of financial services and stimulating the digital transformation of commercial banks, will give birth to more financial service platforms to seize the credit market, form a new competitive pattern, and reduce the credit market share of commercial banks.” (LINE 739-744) “This may be because banks with high resource endowments typically have higher levels of capitalization, can facilitate the use of fintech for business transformation and product innovation, and have strong borrowing capacity, thus creating more liquidity (Fang et al., 2023).” (LINE 769-772) “This may be because the credit structure of large state-owned banks and joint-stock banks shows the characteristics of concentrated customers, high proportion of large loans, and systematic business development. With the support of digital technology, large banks have more competitive advantages in marketing, risk assessment and other aspects. Reducing the operating cost of bank credit business through economies of scale is helpful to improve the willingness of banks to invest liquidity in the medium and long term, thus improving the level of liquidity creation (Xiang and Gao, 2023).” (LINE 788-794) 8. There are many interesting results and the implications should closely linked with the main findings. Response: Thanks for this great point. In the conclusion part of the sixth chapter, we reorganize and put forward corresponding policy suggestions according to the research conclusions of this paper “First, the shortage of bank liquidity has h Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewer3.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318785.r003
9 Oct 2024 Decision Letter - Islam Abdeljawad, Editor Digital transformation and liquidity creation in commercial banks: evidence from the Chinese banking industry PLOS ONE Dear Dr. wen, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 23 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols . We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Islam Abdeljawad Academic Editor PLOS ONE [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??> Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?> Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes ****** 4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??> The PLOS Data policy Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes ****** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??> Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: No ****** Reviewer #2: The corrections are well incorporated, so I have no further comments. I recommend acceptance of the article Reviewer #3: Dear authors, Many thanks for spending time revising the manuscript. I totally agree with your responses. I think the manuscript could be benefit from professional proofreading service. Good luck to your publication, Best regards, ****** what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy Reviewer #2: No Reviewer #3: No ******** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318785.r004
Revision 2
26 Oct 2024 Author Response Thank you very much for this comment. First, we thank reviewer for reminding us this important point. We made some modifications to the expressions in the paper. We also sought the help of a professional language editor to conduct a further review and revision of the paper's language expression. Second, we re-examined and corrected the existing measurement models, and re-evaluated the mediation methods mentioned in the paper. At the same time, we considered and analyzed all possible scenarios that could arise in the mediation model. Finally, We have revised the introduction section of the paper to highlight the main theme and significance of the study more prominently. We have also modified the conclusion section to provide a more in-depth description of the study's focus and significance. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewer.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318785.r005
25 Nov 2024 Decision Letter - Islam Abdeljawad, Editor Digital transformation and liquidity creation in commercial banks: evidence from the Chinese banking industry PLOS ONE Dear Dr. wen, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. Reviewer 4 has a concern arises regarding the decision to exclude only the year 2020 to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the robustness tests. Given that the effects of the pandemic persisted until 2022, the rationale for this exclusion warrants further clarification. Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 09 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols . We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Islam Abdeljawad Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed Reviewer #4: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??> Reviewer #3: Yes Reviewer #4: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?> Reviewer #3: Yes Reviewer #4: Yes ****** 4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??> The PLOS Data policy Reviewer #3: Yes Reviewer #4: Yes ****** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??> Reviewer #3: Yes Reviewer #4: Yes ****** Reviewer #3: Dear authors, I would like to thanks you for spending time addressing all my comments. Good luck to your publication. Reviewer #4: The topic is of significant interest, and the research problems are clearly articulated. Identifying research gaps is well-justified, and the literature review adequately supports the hypothesis formulation. However, a point of concern arises regarding the decision to exclude only the year 2020 to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the robustness tests. Given that the effects of the pandemic persisted until 2022, the rationale for this exclusion warrants further clarification. ****** what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy Reviewer #3: No Reviewer #4: No ******** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318785.r006
Revision 3
30 Nov 2024 Author Response We thank reviewer for reminding us this important point. Through empirical analysis and discussion, we believe that it is more appropriate to exclude the data of 2020 in this paper. For this, we offer the following explanation: Firstly, 2020 was a crucial year for the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, and it was also the year when society was most severely impacted. Due to lockdowns and isolation measures, China's supply chains were disrupted, consumer demand plummeted, and bank liquidity, asset quality, and credit demand experienced significant fluctuations. For example, China's GDP increased from 98.65 trillion yuan in 2019 to 101.36 trillion yuan in 2020, with economic growth slowing from 6% to 2.2%. Therefore, 2020 should be prioritized for exclusion. Secondly, in 2021, the global economy continued to be affected by the fluctuations of the pandemic, but the economy and financial markets began to recover. For example, China's GDP in 2020 was 101.36 trillion yuan, and economic growth was severely stifled, with a mere 2.2% growth rate. In 2021, China's economic recovery trend was obvious, with GDP reaching 114.92 trillion yuan and an 8.4% growth rate. In 2022, the global economy also began to recover, and China gradually loosened economic and trade restrictions. At the same time, digital economy grew rapidly. The liquidity and credit demand of Chinese commercial banks began to approach normal levels. In 2022, the total amount of yuan loans increased by 21.31 trillion yuan, an increase of 136 billion yuan compared to the previous year. The impact of digital transformation on the economy may have become apparent in 2021-2022. Therefore, we suggest retaining the data of 2021 and excluding the data of 2020. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewer4-1130.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318785.r007
22 Jan 2025 Decision Letter - Islam Abdeljawad, Editor Digital transformation and liquidity creation in commercial banks: evidence from the Chinese banking industry PONE-D-24-15838R3 Dear Dr. wen, We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication. An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. Kind regards, Islam Abdeljawad Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author Reviewer #5: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??> Reviewer #5: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?> Reviewer #5: Yes ****** 4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??> The PLOS Data policy Reviewer #5: Yes ****** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??> Reviewer #5: Yes ****** Reviewer #5: (No Response) ****** what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy Reviewer #5: No ******** https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318785.r008
Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Islam Abdeljawad, Editor PONE-D-24-15838R3 PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Wen, I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team. At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following: * All references, tables, and figures are properly cited * All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission, * There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps. Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Islam Abdeljawad Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318785.r009

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .