Latest review
First review round: 5.7 weeks. Overall rating: 4 (very good).
Outcome: Accepted.
Motivation:
The reviews were of intermediate quality. Negative points were that the first reviewer mainly wanted us to cite some literature. The second reviewer said that the theoretical focus does not fit to the journal and we should add more empirical results. I think the editor should decide this question at the beginning before sending the manuscript out for review. Therefore, this should not be a major concern for the reviewer.
However, both reviewers also had some valid points.
