Audio-Visual Preferences for the Exercise-Oriented Population in Urban Forest Parks in China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is very interesting and well performed by the authors, in all its aspects.
By the way, as the argument studied is well know and investigated, my only suggestion is to enrich more the background information by expanding the literature review of similar works, starting from a similar and well know one which is: Cassina, Luca, et al. "Audio-visual preferences and tranquillity ratings in urban areas." Environments 5.1 (2017): 1.
This will also help expanding the reference sections, which is too narrow in Chinese references.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Section 1 can be improved. Authors should emphasize contribution and novelty, the introduction needs to clarify the motivation, challenges, contribution, objectives, and significance/implication. Try to summarize what differentiates your work from others. At the end of the section, add an outline of the rest of the paper, in this way the reader will be introduced to the content of the following sections.
Section 2 must be improved. A section that describes how the psychological aspects were assessed is completely missing. We talk about the likert scale. So the subjects were given a test? So how was the test prepared? The authors used a standard ( for example ISO/TS 15666:2021 or ISO 12913). What the authors asked. In a work that concerns the soundscape this aspect takes on fundamental importance. For this the authors must be extremely precise and clear.
Section 3 must be improved. In this section you present the results of your study which is based on the answers given by the subjects to the questionnaire administered. Begin by introducing the place where the subjects were interviewed. A map with the indication of the area where the survey was carried out by the subjects is missing. Since the short-term experience has a greater impact than the previous ones, it is important to indicate in which area of the park the interviews were carried out. In this way it will be possible to compare these results with the measurements. You should then describe in detail what you asked the subjects. Otherwise, all the tables you have added to this section will be difficult to understand for readers who do not know what was asked.
42-44) Add references to support these statements.
67)” Ma explored” Use the following format: Ma et al. [15]. I have seen that you often use this format, so I will not repeat this advice again, it also applies to the other occurrences.
62-72) Add more references to works that have already dealt with the topic, for example:” Representation of the soundscape quality in urban areas through colours”,” Acoustic, Visual and Spatial Indicators for the Description of the Soundscape of Waterfront Areas with and without Road Traffic Flow”.
130) It would be advisable for you to leave only the third image, in this way you could enlarge it and the reader could better appreciate the type of area under study.
142) Add reference to Questionnaire Star
141-175) How was the test prepared? The authors used a standard ( for example ISO/TS 15666:2021 or ISO 12913). What the authors asked. In a work that concerns the soundscape this aspect takes on fundamental importance. For this the authors must be extremely precise and clear.
182-186) Did the subjects have an audio metric exam or were they simply asked if they had hearing problems?
196) “Cronbach's alpha” Introduce adequately the topic and Add references to allow readers to learn more about the topic.
155-159) Here repeat the same things said before, remove them
215-230) These are already results, move them to the next section.
336) There are many curves, the color alone is not easily appreciated you should also differentiate the stroke. In particular, when the curves overlap. Due to the size of the images, the colors of the legend are not easy to interpret.
338)Review the format of the 3.3.3 section title make it consistent with the others and with the mdpi format.
396) Do not use abbreviation such as i.e. I have seen that you often use this abbreviation, so I will not repeat this advice again, it also applies to the other occurrences.
352) There are many curves, the color alone is not easily appreciated you should also differentiate the stroke. In particular, when the curves overlap. Due to the size of the images, the colors of the legend are not easy to interpret.
367) There are many curves, the color alone is not easily appreciated you should also differentiate the stroke. In particular, when the curves overlap. Due to the size of the images, the colors of the legend are not easy to interpret.
381) Make figure and caption fit on the same page. There are many curves, the color alone is not easily appreciated you should also differentiate the stroke. In particular, when the curves overlap. Due to the size of the images, the colors of the legend are not easy to interpret.
484) Review the format of the section title, make it consistent with the others and with the mdpi format.
502) Review the format of the section title, make it consistent with the others and with the mdpi format.
565) Combine sections 5 and 6 into one section: Conclusion, Limitations and future work
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
L43. References could be added at this point
L46-47: The linkage between the focus of the study and the blockade due to COVID-19 is true, however, it is, at the same time, limiting the wider scope of your study. I kindly suggest that you slightly modify L40-47.
L64: Consider rephrasing “caused”.
L67 – all text: When author names are in text, please see guidelines on the author-[reference number] nexus.
L70-78: Consider rephrasing as “soundscape” is used many times as in L78: ”Currently, most of the soundscape studies focus on the soundscape perception.”
L95: ..have focused on…”
L100: Is landscape and ecology a humanistic field?
L106: … by the subjective… or according to the
L112: Start with a capital letter, as in the lines that follow
L118-119: Please consider “dase study” or the “study area”, not hybrid and more complicated forms
L112: Be more precise – it is not similar.
L126: “exercise population” could be rephrased
L128: Please rephrase
Some more information including e.g. the park area could be really informative.
L132: There is no need for using capital letters in some landscape types
L142: is there a website for Questionnaire Star?
L175: “…to answer the….”
L193. Please link this sentence with the previous text.
In L 105 you report of 406 questionnaires and in L195 od 344 valid ones. Please provide more information on the topic.
A lot of the information provided in L195-230 is, in fact, results of the study. Please move accordingly.
L234: … are, in order of preference….
L232-245: A more detailed presentation of the results could be included. For example, some groupings can be evidenced.
L255: “ites are restricted by mountainous terrain and far from the mountains and forests” Some thing is missing, please rephrase.
L310-317: Please indicate the table of the ANOVA results.
Figure 6b: Is the difference statistically significant or do you rely on the graphical differentiation only (in the case of forests)?
L356: As previously stated, please refer to a table number when a statistical test has been reported
L3365: Could you please change “feel”? Hard to understand.
L393: SPSS Amos is a trademark so capital letters must be used.
In the materials and methods a paragraph on SEM should be added. Why use this modelling instead of other(s)? What are the possible outcomes? All these basic information should be “clearly” stated in the text.
L403: Which were the necessaru corrections (belongs to materials and methods chapter).
L438: …Jeon et al. …
L450: Please rephrase the following “The effects of exerciser exercise behavior”
L531: Please rephrase the following “Those who were accompanied by a companion”
L566: Can we call this survey as a field survey? Isa another term more appropriate?
The Conclusions section has to be re-written. Conclussions is not a summary, rather, among. Others, a projection of actions and suggestions for thew future. This is missing.
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors addressed all the reviewer's comments with sufficient attention and modified the paper consistently with the suggestions provided. The new version of the paper has improved significantly both in the presentation that is now much more accessible even by a reader not expert in the sector, and in the contents that now appear much more incisive.
The addition of a sufficient reference bibliography gave consistency to the authors' statements and the results they achieved.
The detailed description of the figures makes them easier to understand for the reader.
Reviewer 3 Report
You have done good work in addressing the revision issues. Well done!
