Attribute Framework Validation for Wellness Tourism within the Context of Thailand

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

...16% of annual revenue is now wellness (GWI, 2018; WHO, 2018). NOW For something from 2018?

...Adams (2003) proposed the concepts of three main principles of wellness as multidimensional, balance, relative, subjective, and perceptual. Just a tree or more?

There should be text between the headings and under the figure.
Too many similar definitions.
It is not common to use "we" and "our" in text. Prefer "authors."
Define destination wellness. What must a destination contain to be a wellness destination?
What are the characteristics of wellness services in Thailand?
What does wellness mean for Thailand as a destination?
The results of the study are clearly presented, but the author's opinion and position on what these results mean is missing, why are the results obtained important for the destination?

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1, 

I have made an adjustment regarding your comments with yellow highlights

>Adams (2003) proposed Five concepts

>Text between the headings and under figure are added

> We were replaced with authors

> Authors opinion & research contribution were added

Appreciate your support,

Natnisha

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

1. The study needs a detailed description of the study’s novelty, importance, and significance. 2. The theoretical contribution needs to be emphasized more clearly; how does the study contribute to theory and literature? The authors mentioned in the methods section, “ Numerous theories, including the tourism experience theories, wellness attributes, and perceived tourism experience dimensions, were used as a theoretical foundation for this study.” I suggest following one theory rather than making it a mixture. 3. The draft needs extensive proofreading and editing. I suggest Authors should avail English editing service. 4. The conclusion and discussion need more attention. 5. The managerial implications of the study are missing.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,

The paper has been revised according to your comments in Blue highlight

> The study's novelty, importance and significance are added including the theoretical contribution, however, I have emphasized on the cultural differences context more

> The draft has already been proved by professional editor, Enago, English Editing service before submitted to the journal, however, your suggestions will be taken very seriously. We are willing to revise the paper with proofreading and editing again.

> Discussion and conclusion are revised

> Managerial contribution as well as other contributions are added

Appreciate your support and advice.

Regards,

Natnisha

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Short summary

The Authors identify a research gap in the lack of an "exhaustive and systematic wellness attribute framework". They explore this gap within the context of Thailand, providing a contribute to a better design of wellness tourism experience also in different cultural contexts. Specifically, the main goal of this study is to develop an integrated wellness tourism attribute model, by validating the PMSE model of wellness tourism experience and identifying the key underlying attributes within the Thailand context.

The Authors designed a questionnaire consisting of 28 items and collected 383 complete answers. Based on the data collected, a CFA was implemented to explore the attitudes of Thai travelers toward wellness tourism attributes. The SEM approach was used to validate the four-dimensional model proposed. 

The results of descriptive statistic display a consensus within the data acquired that all the four dimensions of the PMSE experience framework contributed to the wellness tourism experience. Results confirm that the mental experience dimension accounted for the most variance with an indicator value of 0.99 in the framework. Spiritual and environmental experiences share the same indicator value of 0.87, while physical experience has the least indicator value of 0.78. Accordingly, the Authors conclude that the PMSE framework is a valid model for a wellness tourism experience design within the Thailand context. Also, the mental experience appeared to be a dominant determinant of the experiential outcomes.

General comments

a) the p-values reported in the main text are above 0.1, and this may suggest that most estimates are not statistically significant at 95% level of confidence. Authors are invited to add p-values in Table 2 and 3 and to add a comment on the credibility (the level of confidence) of their estimates. Additionally, if p-values are in general above 0.1, Authors are invited to work on a subset of regressors to improve the credibility of their estimates.

b) It is not clear to me why the Authors add in Table 2 and 3 an R^2 column instead of a p-value. Author are invited to add a methodological section before results setion to better explain their estimation strategy. 

Minor comments

a) The article is well structured, but need some proofreading, because sometimes concepts overlap and topics are not well connected. As an example, consider the following proposition taken from section 2.2.:

"Hence, while increasing evidence supports the consideration of wellness tourism attributes within different culture contexts, the literature review offers an exhaustive overview of the wellness attributes that remain fragmented, while the PMSE model seems to be the most general and solid model from a holistic lens. The present research sought to validate the widely accepted PMSE model of wellness tourism experience and to identify 
the key underlying attributes within the Thailand context. The research question was set as follows:
RQ: What is the key underlying attribute framework of wellness tourism experience within the Thailand context?
The results of the study will give more complete information regarding the wellness  tourism attribute framework within the context of Thailand."

I understand that the literature provides an exhaustive overview of wellness attributes, even if a comprehensive model is still lacking and the overall picture remains fragmented. On the other hand, empirical analyses investigate wellness tourism attributes within specific cultural contexts. In both cases, there is consensus on the effectiveness of the PMSE model, that is considered as an appropriate general framework to represent wellness attributes in a holistic perspective. Based on these premises, the research provides an empirical validation of the PMSE model of wellness tourism experience and identifies its key underlying attributes within the Thailand context.  

b) In section 3.5 it is not clear if the sample size is 383 or 384.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3,

The statistic parts has been revised according to your suggestions with green highlights

> P Values added with explanation

> Concept overlapping has issue has been revised, thus, the paper has been proofreading with a professional editing service, Enago. But we are willing to revise the paper again.

> The correct sample size is 384 and been adjusted

Appreciate your support and suggestion.

Regards,

 

Natnisha

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors,

Please read and apply the comments that I have included in the manuscript file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 4,

The adjustment based on your suggestion had been made with the purple highlights.

> Cultural context factor has been emphasized

> Methodology part has been revised for how quantitative techniques were used for generalities of sample group

> Abstract & introduction section has been adjusted with cultural differences & measurement

Your comments and suggestions are highly appreciated.

Regards,

 

Natnisha

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 5 Report

This paper develops and validates the key underlying attributes of the wellness tourism experience framework within the Thailand context. The author(s) say that “Research on the theoretical integration between attributes of wellness tourism in the form of physical, mental, spiritual, and environmental attributes frameworks (PMSE) and cultural differences has not been conducted before.” However, they do not pay attention to cultural differences. Authors should explicitly show how they contributed to cultural differences in the empirical research design and findings. The author uses PMSE model in the empirical analysis with four dimensions and it does not include cultural differences. So, how this paper contributes to the cultural dimension is a question mark.

The author(s)  also says that “From reviewing the related literature to identify potential sub-attributes under four dimensions of the PMSE framework, developing themes using the Theory-Driven and Prior-Research-Driven Method was conducted in this study.” However, one can not see clearly how and wherein the paper the authors use theorydriven method.

About methodology, they are just emphasizing superficially that quantitative techniques. But they do not explain the techniques they applied for both analyzing cultural differences.

However interesting the main subject is, the theoretical section discussion and discussing cultural differences and measuring it with the method is the weakness of the paper.

This paper requires a major critical change in the theoretical section about discussing the importance of cultural differences and their measurement indicators for strengthening the methodology section to reach the main aim discussed in the abstract and in the introduction section of the paper.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 5,

Adjustment regarding your comment was made to the paper with yellow highlights.

> More information of Thailand wellness tourism is added

> How to get the high ratio of participation via snowball technique is added

> More explanation of sample sizes and selection criteria was conducted

Appreciate your support and advice

Regards,

 

Natnisha

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 6 Report

Dear authors,

I appreciate your paper as being very interesting and useful for the stakeholders. Wellness tourism is a growing segment and the actual changes in the tourists profile that are more focused on their health and wellbeing are clues that this segment will increase in the next years also. However, the article has some parts that shall be improved in order to be published. As it is, there is no enough information about the subject you approached, about the methodology and discussions. Please consider the following suggestions: 

• please add more information about Thailand as destination for wellness tourism. The theoretical background should be improved
• The methodology part should be extended and include more specific information about the research methods from the beginning. Please add more information about the methods used (the research is based on questionnaire). The first paragraph should be rewritten ”This study adopted an interdisciplinary approach of quantitative method focused on ....”
• the rate of participation of the study is really high ( 490 surveys were sent via social media platforms, such as Line and Facebook,
  using non-purposive techniques, and 444 completed it). Please explain how you reached this high ratio of participation. Also, I consider that ”only” should not be included here ”and only 444 agreed to participate in the research”
• wellness tourism is not specific to the young generation, even though in the last years we can see a change in the tourists profile in terms of age. Despite of this, you chose for the research 18 years old respondents. Please specify why and how their answers about wellness tourism should be reliable since this segment of age is not familiar with this type of tourism. 
• please expand the discussion section and link your results with other research
• please add the questionnaire as Annex 

All the best

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 6,

The revision after your comment was made with a yellow highlights

> questionnaire was added in annex

> Discussion has been revised

Your comment and suggestions are highly appreciated

Regards,

 

Natnisha

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors must follow the format of the journal.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,

I have revised the paper format to be aligned with the journal format

Abstract

1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Methods
4. Findings & Discussion
5. Conclusion

Appreciate your suggestion and support.

Regards,

Natnisha Kongtaveesawas

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors,

Well, the manuscript has been corrected with reference to the comments of all the other reviewers, except mine. However, I accept this new version of the manuscript.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3,

Appreciate your support but I have already response to your inout in the first revision as of >> Cultural differences dimension and Thailand Wellness tourism characteristic

 

Wellness tourism in terms of cultural differences, besides the ideological differences, the use of concepts varies within different contexts and disciplines. Various forms of wellness tourism are gaining an enhanced role and enhance the economic performance of each wellness destination. The countries with the most significant wellness supplies and tourist movement are in the first place in Europe, North America, and Southeast Asia respectively (GWI 2020). The different cultural context such as the enhancement of individualization, demographic transformations, changes in gender’s social roles, spiritualization, the appreciation of healthy lifestyles have created the social background of different demand for wellness services and products (Csirmaz & Peto, 2015). The fact, thus, the various potential countries as wellness destinations are unable to fully exploit the potentials hidden in the destination context apart from the appropriate attributes’ framework of PMSE model. Regarding wellness data, there are no fixed wellness attributes framework to make wellness services competitive and trustworthy. For this reason, this study seeks to introduce the importance of cultural dimension application for more effective wellness attribute framework in the scope of national trend.

 2.3 Thailand Wellness Tourism Characteristics

In the past decade, South-Eastern Asia wellness tourism is regarded to be one of the wellness touristic areas with the most successful and significant development potential. Considering the outstanding dynamic development, most of the countries in the Southeast Asian Countries possesses the resources and traditions that can be applied as wellness tourism attributes. Moreover, the advanced state of the touristic super culture has created the basis of qualified wellness facilities establishment.

Thailand is often regarded as one of the most attractive and pleasurable tourism destination in Asia (Kontogeorgopoulos., 2015; Ramos et al., 2017).  Wellness tourism is undoubtedly a large pillar of inbound tourism in Thailand, contributing to Thailand’s economy (Han et al., 2018; Thongpan & Yu, 2015). Thailand inbound wellness tourism and its oriduct are believed to have a further development opportunity (Liu et al., 2018; Thongpan & Yu, 2015).

To boost the growth of the wellness tourism industry as well as promoting Thailand as a leading wellness destination, The Tourism Authority of Thailand initiated many wellness campaigns such as “Find Your Fabulous” in 2013 along with branding the coutry as the “Spa Capital of Asia” (Thongpan & Yu 2015). Since the mid-200s. Thailand has become the wellness tourism destination, with the largest number of wellness spa facilities in Asia.

Wellness tourism in Thailand context, there are several types of wellness activities that tourists can choose to take part, for example, joining in sport/ adventure, spa and beauty, spiritual/ mind recovery and places providing healthy food (Bhumiwat & Aston 2020). Each activity has its own unique way of creating travel satisfaction and well-being.       

In this 2nd revision, I emphasized more on cultural dimensions as in 2.4.

Regards,

 

Natnisha Kongtaveesawas

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 5 Report

Even though authors made some improvements on the other reviewer's comments, I have not seen any improvement in the paper about my only comment "This paper has major weaknesses in evaluating the role of cultural differences not only in theoretical discussion but also in adapting it to the PMSE model they employed which is claimed as the originality and the contribution. This part should be discussed and measured to be accepted for the journal."

There is still no reply and measurement method explanation on evaluating cultural differences. So I still give major revisions for this paper.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 5,

Additional study of cultural dimension impact has been added in literature review section 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4.

In 3.5. and 3.6 Cultural dimension has also been implied for methods of Data Analysis

Data analyses for retaining the attribute frameworks proceeded into a series of steps. Factor analysis is the main multiple factor analysis technique adopted to examine the attitudes of Thai travelers toward wellness tourism attributes, which focuses on the inter-relationships between many variables and the perceptions of Thai travelers, while the latter attempts to identify the Thailand wellness attribute framework. After collecting the data, CFA was chosen for dimension reduction (factor) and scale (reliability analysis).

I appreciate your suggestion and agree that with cultural dimensions emphasized, the paper is more credible.

Regards,

Natnisha Kongtaveesawas

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 6 Report

Dear authors,

Thank you for your effort. I appreciate the improvements you made on the paper.

 

All the best!

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 6, 

Pls find attache the 2nd revision with more emphasis on cultural dimension.

Appreciate your support.

Best regards,

Natnisha Kongtaveesawas

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 5 Report

Some clarifications has been made based on how to add the cultural dimension to the research design.