Next Article in Journal
Enabling Knowledge Discovery in Multi-Objective Optimizations of Worker Well-Being and Productivity
Previous Article in Journal
Spatial Matching Analysis and Development Strategies of County Night-Time Economy: A Case of Anning County, Yunnan Province
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Canadian Consumers’ Dining Behaviors during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Implications for Channel Decisions in the Foodservice Industry

Sustainability 2022, 14(9), 4893; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14094893
by Gumataw Kifle Abebe 1, Sylvain Charlebois 2,* and Janet Music 2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Sustainability 2022, 14(9), 4893; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14094893
Submission received: 16 March 2022 / Revised: 3 April 2022 / Accepted: 18 April 2022 / Published: 19 April 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The purpose of the study is of great interest taking into consideration the current global context regarding the spread of the Coronavirus and its implications concerning consumer's behaviour. However, I appreciate that a restructuring of the material is necessary and I suggest the following recommendations:

  1. Giving the complexity of the paper, I consider useful to construct a diagram in order to describe the succession of the stages completed in the application of statistical and econometric methods. These methods should be correlated with the objectives of the study.
  2. In the Methods section should be included a table containing the variables created from the applied questionnaire and used in the study. For each of them, the measurement scales should be also indicated.
  3. It is necessary to indicate the place of the two sets of dependent variables (i.e., „(1) experience of off-premise dining (takeout/delivery, curbside pickup, and drive-thru) and on-premise dining, and (2) perceived price, quality, food safety, and convenience of service offerings.”) in the Conceptual framework (see Figure 1).
  4. The manuscript presents 2 independent studies developed around the 2 sets of dependent variables. It is necessary to justify the parallel presentation of these 2 studies and to formulate discussions indicating the relationship between them.
  5. I suggest the formulation of some recommendations for operators in the food service industry based on the research results.

Good luck!

Author Response

Please see attached. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed people’s daily life and behavior dramatically. Business models have adapted to overcome the immediate and long-term impacts of thee COVID-19 pandemic. This paper investigated the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on dining service. The findings will have implications for casual and dining restaurants in Canada. My specific comments are as follows.

[1] I suggest “Food service industry; the COVID-19 pandemic; sustainable business model; channel decisions; telecommuting; dining behavior; Canada” in Keywords.

[2] In Page 2 and Page 3, “This study aims to explore…” and “In terms of practice, understanding …”, I think these two paragraphs need revisions. The paragraph “This study aims to explore…” should be the last part in Introduction.

[3] No need to review the literatures about foodservice before the pandemic.

[4] In Page 4 “Sociodemographic factors…”, why not cite “Byrd, Her, et al (2021)” with [46]?

[5] Center figure titles and table titles.

[6] I suggest “Data and Methodology” as the title of section 3.

[7] I think it is better to add the survey sample as appendix.

[8] The writing quality needs improvements. 

Author Response

Please see attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript examines Canadian consumers' dining behaviors when facing the threat of COVID-19.

The authors present a merit report. However, there are a couple of concerns regarding the manuscript.

The first is the citation style. For example, the Literature review section cited studies by Hakim et al. (2021) and Byrd, Her, et al. (2021). However, it is difficult for readers to swiftly track these two studies when the referenced studies are presented in numerical order in the References section.

The second concern is that the manuscript does not clearly explain how it drew the relevant literature to develop the survey questionnaire.

Author Response

Please see attached. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I consider that the authors updated the manuscript in accordance with the reviewer’s comments and recommendations. However, Table 14 is missing from the manuscript. After it will be included, I appreciate that the paper can be published without any other changes. Good luck to the authors in their future research!

Back to TopTop