The Impacts of Subjective Health and Life Expenses on Quality of Life for Korean Elderly People

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please enhence your value added in the introduction and conclusion section.

More developpement in the discussion and conclusion is requered.

I suggest to include one or more moderator variables  

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the enclosed files.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1)Authors should add motivation and contribution in the introduction section

2)The data you have used in this research is old from 2018-2020

3)How the proposed model is beneficial in decentralized system?

4)The grammar and typos error must be taken care 

5)Author should add advantages and disadvantages of the proposed model.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the enclosed files.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study focused on the impacts of subjective health and life expenses on quality of life for Korean elderly. Across the globe, the growth of eldery population is indeed a huge problem at the moment. With this, this paper is a very timely and well-written manuscript. There are a few things that need to be checked and revised.

1. In the introduction, the authors discussed consumption patterns, which is a very important concept. But, the connection between consumption patterns and quality of life is rather weak. please strengthen the relationship.

2. In the discussion, the authors tried to explain why the quality of life in 2020 is higher than that in 2018. however, it seems to be scientifically no sound enough. please go through it again and provide a more concrete explanation.

3. Besides, please explain the findings with the context of COVID 19 again to provide more practically applicable implications.

Author Response

Please see the enclosed files.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

·         In cross-sectional data sets, there is a high chance of common method bias. However, I could not see any tests for common method bias or social desirability bias.

·  The review contains several long and complex sentences that may be challenging for some readers to follow. Break down these sentences into shorter, more straightforward ones to enhance clarity.

·         structure and organize the work- paragraph by paragraph.

provide more and strong argument on hypothesis development Comments on the Quality of English Language

please proofread the paper with a native English speaker. I am not a native speaker, but I detected several grammatical mistakes. I could not note all of them here. However, be consistent with citations, references, and wording throughout the paper.

Author Response

Please see the enclosed files.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

ok

Author Response

Reviewer 2

1. ok

Response) We appreciate the comments for the improvement of this work.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I would thank the authors to address all comments.

Author Response

Reviewer 3

1 I would thank the authors to address all comments.

Response) We appreciate the comments for the improvement of this work.

 

If you have further question and comments, please let us know.

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It's required to justify the theoritical gap investigated.

emprirical results need more discussion. 

Please imporve the discussion part .

Please enhance the implications.

Please imporve the future directions.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

it's also suggested to process with proof reading

Author Response

Please see the enclosed files. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 4

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

NA

Comments on the Quality of English Language

NA