The Role of the Mechanisms of Adjustment in Moderating the Relationship between Perceived Crowding and Satisfaction in Urban Forest Parks

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have reviewed the manuscript and found that the subject is interesting and the aim of the contribution is clear. The paper has merits for the scientific community interested in problems of the relationships between perceived crowding, emotion, and satisfaction of tourists/visitors of urban forest parks and their adjustment mechanisms. Manuscript is well written and easy to follow.

 Below are few comments and suggestions:

 1.      Figures 2 and 3 should be replaced with figures of better resolution.

2.      Page 8. Authors should add the description of the the average variance extracted (AVE) and the composite reliability (CR) as well as the meaning of obtained values (0.45; 0.7).  

3.      Abbreviations RMSEA, CFI, TLI, IFI, and GFI should be explained.

4.      Figure 5 is missing.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript. We appreciate you very much for your positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “The Role of Mechanisms of Adjustment in the Relationship between Perceived Crowding and Satisfaction in Urban Forest Parks”.

We are delighted that you consider the subject is interesting and the aim of the contribution is clear, and the manuscript is well written and easy to follow. At the same time, your comments and suggestions helped us gain a better understanding of and deeper insight into the key issues that we needed to reflect upon to revise and improve the manuscript. Below, we indicate how we made revisions based on your comments and suggestions. (The red fonts in the manuscript are the revised part):

 

1. Figures 2 and 3 should be replaced with figures of better resolution.

Thanks for your comments. Figures 2 and 3 have been replaced with figures of better resolution (Page 6-7).

2. Page 8. Authors should add the description of the average variance extracted (AVE) and the composite reliability (CR) as well as the meaning of obtained values (0.45; 0.7).

Thanks for your comments. We add the description of the average variance extracted (AVE) and the coefficient of reliability (CR) as well as the meaning of the values (Page 8-9).

3. Abbreviations RMSEA, CFI, TLI, IFI, and GFI should be explained.

Thanks for your comments. We add the elaboration of the RMSEA (root mean square error of approximation), CFI (comparative fit index), TLI (tucker lewis index), IFI (incremental fit index), and GFI (goodness of fit index), as well as the specific values (Page 8).

4. Figure 5 is missing.

Thanks for your comments. We supplement the Figure 5. in P13. The figure 5 corresponds to the text description in “4.3.4 The moderating effects of mechanisms of adjustment” (Page 13).

 

Thanks again for your comments. Your comments are of great significance for the improvement of this manuscript. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.

All authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The research is interesting analyzing the relationship between crowding perception, emotion and satisfaction with the adjustment mechanisms to explore the satisfaction of tourists in a forest park. However, it will be important to describe the mechanisms of adjustment from the beginning as it can be confusing for the reader (document with comments attached).

The topic is original and relevant and contributes to the area of urban forestry, but I emphasize emphasizing the way in which the adjustment mechanisms were addressed, since apparently they are only analyzed in 5 categories and it is a concept that is frequently addressed and mentioned in much of the document.

Although the subject is little studied, it will be important to emphasize a more that the work was only done in a park, so the results must be taken into consideration so as not to generalize them.

Regarding the structure, it will be important to enrich the introduction with the description of the adjustment mechanisms, as well as to generate a data analysis section to have a better idea, once the results are seen.

The conclusions are not clearly emphasized, so they should have a specific section on this section.

The references are appropriate and I have no comments on the tables and figures. Specific and additional comments are indicated in the attached PDF.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

The papers has a good English quality

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

 

We thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript. We appreciate you very much for your positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “The Role of Mechanisms of Adjustment in the Relationship between Perceived Crowding and Satisfaction in Urban Forest Parks”.

We are delighted that you consider the topic is original and relevant and contributes to the area of urban forestry. At the same time, your comments and suggestions helped us gain a better understanding of and deeper insight into the key issues that we needed to reflect upon to revise and improve the manuscript. Below, we indicate how we made revisions based on your comments and suggestions. (The red fonts in the manuscript are the revised part):

 

1. The research is interesting analyzing the relationship between crowding perception, emotion and satisfaction with the adjustment mechanisms to explore the satisfaction of tourists in a forest park. However, it will be important to describe the mechanisms of adjustment from the beginning as it can be confusing for the reader (document with comments attached).

Thanks for your comments. We modify all the “adjustment mechanism” into “mechanisms of adjustment” and replace the keywords according to the reviewer's suggestion (Page 1). At the same time, we add the description of the mechanisms of adjustment in the Introduction (Page 2 marked in red), and also explain the meaning and types of mechanisms of adjustment in detail in the section of “2.1. Activity types and mechanisms of adjustment” (Page 3 marked in red).

2.The topic is original and relevant and contributes to the area of urban forestry, but I emphasize emphasizing the way in which the adjustment mechanisms were addressed, since apparently, they are only analyzed in 5 categories and it is a concept that is frequently addressed and mentioned in much of the document.

Thank you for your insightful comments. Following your suggestions, we change the research constructs “adjustment mechanism” into “mechanisms of adjustment” in the manuscript. We also revise the manuscript accordingly.

We add the description of the mechanisms of adjustment in the Introduction (Page 2 marked in red), and explain the meaning and types of mechanisms of adjustment in detail in the section of “2.1. Activity types and mechanisms of adjustment” (Page marked in red).

3.Although the subject is little studied, it will be important to emphasize a more that the work was only done in a park, so the results must be taken into consideration so as not to generalize them.

You raise an important point. The study is based on urban-type forest parks and complements previous studies that focused on theme parks and natural scenic areas (Page 14 in "5.1 Theoretical implications"). Therefore, we emphasize the significance of the findings for improving the construction of urban forest park in discussion (Page 14 in "5.2 Practical implications"). At the same time, we also emphasize the limitations in the "7. Study limitations" section at the end, that is, our study is conducted on urban forest parks, and the relationships between perceived crowding, mechanisms of adjustment, emotions, and visitor satisfaction in other types of parks and tourist attractions need to be further verified. Moreover, for urban forest parks, we only collected data in the Dafu Mountain Forest Park, and the specifics of other urban-type forest parks need to be further explored in the future (Page 16).

 

4.Regarding the structure, it will be important to enrich the introduction with the description of the adjustment mechanisms, as well as to generate a data analysis section to have a better idea, once the results are seen.

Thanks for your comments. According to the recommendations, we enrich the introduction with the description of the mechanisms of adjustment, and explain the meaning and types of mechanisms of adjustment in the section of “2.1. Activity types and mechanisms of adjustment” (Page 3 marked in red).

Regarding the study of the mechanisms of adjustment, we analyze the relationship between the activity type and the choice of the mechanisms of adjustment (supplemented the results of ANOVA and multiple-group comparison analysis in Page 10-11), as well as the moderating effect of in the relationship between the perception of crowding and satisfaction, corresponding to the results of the data analysis in Page 12-13.

5.The conclusions are not clearly emphasized, so they should have a specific section on this section.

Thanks for your comments. We restructure the “Discussion”, “Conclusions” and  “Research Limitations” at the end of the manuscript, and then clarify the findings in the“Conclusions” and improve the content (Page 16).

6.The references are appropriate and I have no comments on the tables and figures. Specific and additional comments are indicated in the attached PDF.

Thanks for your comments. We have carefully reviewed the attached PDF and have made corresponding modifications. We would like to add here the contents that are not responded to above but are marked in the attached PDF, and the corresponding modifications have been marked in red in the manuscript:

• We add the part of “3.4. Data Analysis” in “3. Materials and Methods”, which describes the methods of data analysis used in the study.
• The image processing mentioned in “4.3.2. Perceived crowding and tourist satisfaction” is a methodology, so we adjust it to the “3.2. Questionnaire Design” (Page 6 marked in red).
• The corresponding analysis of the data analysis results in Table 5. is in the highlighted section of the “4.3.3 The mediating effect of emotions” in Page 11.

 

Thanks again for your comments. Your comments are of great significance for the improvement of this manuscript.

 

Thanks again for your comments. Your comments are of great significance for the improvement of this manuscript. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.

 

All authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The theme of the paper is very interesting and the content very well organized. The introduction provides information about the paper's background and the references are all relevant with the research. Both the Results and the Discussion and conclusions sections are very well organized. I believe that the paper can be published in its current form.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We appreciate you very much for your positive and constructive comments on our manuscript entitled “The Role of Mechanisms of Adjustment in the Relationship between Perceived Crowding and Satisfaction in Urban Forest Parks”. We are delighted that you consider the theme of the paper is very interesting and the content very well organized.

In this revised version, we continue to improve the relevant content to better support the rationality and credibility of the manuscript, and check the grammar and usage of the full text, striving to be more accurate and fluent in expression. If you have more suggestions, please let us know, we will revise and review again to ensure the final quality.

All authors

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

After reviewing the new version of the manuscript, it is noted that the authors substantially improved the version and that they addressed the comments indicated in the review process. Therefore, I have no additional comments to the new version.

In general, the quality of the English language is good, I don't have specific comments about it.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We appreciate you very much for your positive comments on our manuscript.

In this revised version, we continue to improve the relevant content to better support the rationality and credibility of the manuscript, and check the grammar and usage of the full text, striving to be more accurate and fluent in expression. If you have more suggestions, please let us know, we will revise and review again to ensure the final quality.

All authors