Theory of Planned Behavior to Understand Commuter’s Perception towards Mass Rapid Transit in Dhaka City, Bangladesh
, Nazmus Sakib 2, Tonmoy Paul 3,*, Nafis Anwari 4 and Shohel Amin 5Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the abstract I could not understand how you validated the data collection?
In the abstract it is not clear what did environmental concern mean?
The AMOS use COVARIANCE-BASES SEM. In this type of SEM it is not possible to insert nominal variables such as gender or car-ownership.
What was the reason for considering these hypotheses?
Why 764 respondents are sufficient?
Why this distribution of your sample in table 1 is acceptable?
Please also present the path coefficients and their significance in a graphical model.
Please presents the abbreviations in a table.
The authors insist on their case study is harmful for an international research paper. It made it hard to follow and conclude for other case studies. Especially in the results section.
Please also present the model goodness of fit criteria?
How we can use your outputs for other case studies?
In the abstract I could not understand how you validated the data collection?
In the abstract it is not clear what did environmental concern mean?
The AMOS use COVARIANCE-BASES SEM. In this type of SEM it is not possible to insert nominal variables such as gender or car-ownership.
What was the reason for considering these hypotheses?
Why 764 respondents are sufficient?
Why this distribution of your sample in table 1 is acceptable?
Please also present the path coefficients and their significance in a graphical model.
Please presents the abbreviations in a table.
The authors insist on their case study is harmful for an international research paper. It made it hard to follow and conclude for other case studies. Especially in the results section.
Please also present the model goodness of fit criteria?
How we can use your outputs for other case studies?
Author Response
Please see the response to the Reviewer 1 comments as an attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This is a good paper. The authors deal with a critical transport issue, especially in the case of a developing country such as Bangladesh. The research questions, methods, results, and policy implications are well described and explained. I have the following comments that authors need to consider for improving their paper:
1. Line 18: I guess that you mean "the first urban rail transit system"
2. Line 49-50: Please rephrase. There are grammatical mistakes.
3. Introduction: Authors need to clarify what MRT and DMR are. Is DMR a part of MRT, or are they separate networks?
4. Figure 1: Though it is said in its description, Figure 1 does not show which segments of MRT6 are underground and which are elevated.
5. Section 3.1, Lines 261-265: When discussing their research framework, the authors state that environmental activism and sociodemographic aspects influence behavior. Their references, however, are not explicitly related to travel mode choice. The authors could enhance their review by considering more relevant references. Examples are: (a) Senikidou, N., Basbas, S., Georgiadis, G., & Campisi, T. (2022). The Role of Personal Identity Attributes in Transport Mode Choice: The Case Study of Thessaloniki, Greece. Social Sciences, 11(12), 564. (b) Alizadeh, H., & Sharifi, A. (2023). Analyzing Urban Travel Behavior Components in Tehran, Iran. Future Transportation, 3(1), 236-253. (c) Heinen, Eva. 2016. Identity and travel behaviour: A cross-sectional study on commute mode choice and intention to change. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 43: 238–53.
6. Table 1 and Line 341: Some respondents belong to the age group [0-18 years old]. These people are not adults, and I wonder whether the authors took additional procedures to allow their participation in the survey (e.g., were these people supervised by a senior?). Moreover, I guess there were no respondents under, for instance, ten years old because I doubt whether they would fully understand the questionnaire's content. So, I also suggest authors specify this age category better.
7. Lines 352-356 and Figure 3: Does this graph represent the main travel mode of the 584 respondents who do not use the DMR? Please clarify.
8. The sample size for Model 1 is 154 respondents. This is small. Authors should explain the minimum sample size requirements for conducting SEM analysis and highlight their small sample size for Model 1 as a limitation of their study.
The quality of English is fine. There are some grammatical mistakes and rephrasings needed throughout the manuscript. Some of them are highlighted in my comments. Authors should check their manuscript carefully to correct any errors.
Author Response
Please see the response to the Reviewer 2 comments as an attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
