Empirical Study on the Impact of Different Types of Forest Environments in Wuyishan National Park on Public Physiological and Psychological Health

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors, thank you for very interesting research approach.

Below I indicate some changes that you should make in your manuscript.

Line 170, add: “These segments, oriented from north to south and west to east (Fig. 2),”

Line 173, add to the list of segments the reference to the Figure 3: “and Rock-Bedded Streamscape (Fig. 3).”

In tables 1, 4 and 6 change the T to S.

In section 2.3, it would be interesting to include the percentage of participants from urban, versus rural, backgrounds.

Line 228, add: “which are detailed in the methods section 2.5.”

In section 2.5.1. explain the origin of the acronym EDA that appears in section 2.6 and Figure 3.

Include some reference in point 2.7, particularly for the types of sphericity correction used.

Replace the term “valence” with another more appropriate one.

Correct the footer of figure 9, indicating the meaning of the acronyms that appear in the graph. Indicate why the axes are at EMG = 4.83 and SCL = 1.20.

In section 3.3. include a Bonferroni analysis, as in 3.1, at least for the TMD variable.

In section 4.1.1. The statement that appears in lines 446 to 448 is not referenced and also does not agree with the research data (Taba 1). It requires a little more explanation.

In the conclusions, the content from line 542, “For future…” to the end, would take you to section 4.3.

The conclusions should include the answer to how the various forest environments influence the well-being of the participants. The conclusions need more concreteness and elaboration.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this response. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the opportunity to review your manuscript. My review is attached. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this response. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I think it is a very interesting investigation that can continue to be developed along these lines. The submitted manuscript contains relevant results, the experimental design is correct and well developed.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for making the minor changes.