Dear Dr. Qiu,

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 Mar 03 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.

• 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,

Tyler Horan

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: This research was supported in part by the Philosophy and Social Planning Project of Heilongjiang Province under Grant Nos. 22GLB105 and 23GLA011.

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.

3. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition).

For example, authors should submit the following data:

- The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

- The values used to build graphs;

- The points extracted from images for analysis.

Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study.

If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear Zeguo Qiu,

After consideration by a a number of reviewers, I have elected to require major revisions to this article. While the paper offers valuable insights into influencer marketing using a novel theoretical framework, it requires substantial revision to improve clarity, rigor, and applicability. Addressing the issues below and in the reviewer comments will strengthen its contribution to both academic literature and practical applications.

1. The language in several sections is overly technical, which might hinder comprehension for readers outside the field.

2. The literature review is heavily skewed towards industry reports and lacks sufficient academic citations. Furthermore, key theoretical foundations like influencer marketing or network game theory are underdeveloped.

3. The reliance on simulations without validation against real-world data limits the practical credibility of the findings.

As for the writing, there are redundancies and inconsistencies, particularly in the introduction and methodology sections. Before further submission, please ensure that the reviewers comments are addressed.

Best Regards,

Tyler Horan

[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: No

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Reviewer #1: Both the title (‘Research on Influencer Marketing Strategies Based on Double-Layer Network Game Theory’) and the abstract are well structured with an adequate identification of what is subsequently addressed in the text.

It is an article that contributes to society and helps to promote knowledge about the importance and role of influencers in the construction and tailoring of marketing strategies and, therefore, of their orientation towards society and consumers.

The objectives and hypotheses are well stated and appropriate, with methodological rigour and well-designed and thought-out research instruments.

The results are clearly presented, and it is a solid article, with a good presentation of the objectives. It is therefore a clearly publishable article. In any case, I suggest that the following texts be considered and reviewed:

- Gurrieri, L., Drenten, J., & Abidin, C. (Eds.). (2024). Influencer Marketing: Interdisciplinary and Socio-Cultural Perspectives. Taylor & Francis.

- Jiménez-Marín, G., Sanz-Marcos, P., & Tobar-Pesantez, L. B. (2021). Keller's resonance model in the context of fashion branding: persuasive impact through the figure of the influencer. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 20 (6).

- Lee, J., Walter, N., Hayes, J. L., & Golan, G. J. (2024). Do Influencers Influence? A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Celebrities and Social Media Influencers Effects. Social Media+ Society, 10(3), 20563051241269269.

- Sanz Marcos, P., Jiménez-Marín, G., & Elías-Zambrano, R. E. (2021). Aplicación y uso del Modelo de Resonancia o Customer-Based Brand Equity (CBBE). Estudio de la lealtad de marca a través de la figura del influencer. methaodos. revista de ciencias sociales, 9(2), 200-218.

- Zozaya-Durazo, L., Feijoo, B., & Sádaba, C. (2023). The Role that Influencers Play in Consumption Decisions Made by Minors. Doxa Comunicación, 36, 401-413.

Reviewer #2: The current version is not acceptable for publication in PLOS ONE. This current version does not covey any novel findings. At the same time the figures are not well-prepared. Need to improve all the sections carefully with scientific insights.

**********

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: No

Reviewer #2: 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.

Research on Influencer Marketing Strategies Based on Double-Layer Network Game Theory

PONE-D-24-46619R1

Dear Dr. Qiu,

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,

Tyler Horan

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: All the considerations that were raised with regard to authorship correspond, in the current text, to a revised version. Check. And in this sense, for my part, the article is suitable for publication.

Reviewer #3: Thank you for the opportunity to read such an interesting paper related to Influencer Marketing Strategies Based on Double-Layer Network Game Theory. The paper is very interesting and addresses a novel topic. However I would have some suggestions to improve it. In my opinion the abstract is too long and I did not clearly find the main objectives to this study. The final part of the paper should also include, in my opinion, discussion of the results obtain though the lens of other research in the field (links with other research with results similar or opposite). At the same time, the scientific novelty of the paper is not very clear, nor are the implication for literature in this field.

**********

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: No

Reviewer #3: No

**********