Public Concern and Awareness of National Parks in China: Evidence from Social Media Big Data and Questionnaire Data
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is well-structured. The language used is above average standard though there are some grammatical errors in the paper. However, there are some critical issues that need to the authors’ clarification or addressing:
1. A clear conceptual framework should be provided. In its current form, the paper is silent on what the research questions are.
2. How were the research questions aligned with the questions in the questionnaire and/or themes in the analyses?
3. How the questionnaire survey was designed and conducted has not been well explained in the paper. For example, what kind of sampling method was adopted? How was the questionnaire designed? What were the instruments or scales used and why were they chosen?
4. How were the data from different sources integrated? I would suggest the authors to present a clear strategy on the data collection and analysis for the research.
5. What was the LDA model chosen for the big data analysis? The LDA model has a lot of limitations. For example, it is not suitable for short, user-generated text. Stronger justifications are needed for the use of the LDA model.
6. The findings of the survey were presented descriptively. I would expect some statistical tests were conducted on the survey data.
Author Response
Thank you for your careful review. We really appreciate your efforts in reviewing our manuscript during this unprecedented and challenging time. We wish good health to you, your family, and community. Your careful review has helped to make our study clearer and more comprehensive, and our point-by-point responses are presented above. The responses to your comments are marked in red and presented following.
Point 1: A clear conceptual framework should be provided. In its current form, the paper is silent on what the research questions are.
Response 1: Thank you for the suggestion. As we know, a lack of public participation has limited the development of high-quality national parks in China. Some study find that enhancing the public's intention to participate, the primary consideration should be to enhance the public's basic awareness, information awareness, and value awareness of reserves. In other words, it is important to clarify the public's concern and awareness of the national park for improving public participation. Therefore, this paper will explore the public's concern and awareness of national parks, and how to improve public participation through public concern and awareness. We have added the research framework as explained above (Fig. 1, page 4).
Point 2: How were the research questions aligned with the questions in the questionnaire and/or themes in the analyses?
Response 2: The research questions of this paper is mainly about the public's concern and awareness of national parks. Meanwhile, we designed the questionnaire based on research questions,and it mainly includes three aspects: basic information, public concern and awareness. Besides, in the analysis of the results, we also mainly analyzed the public's concern and awareness of national parks. Therefore, the research questions are consistent with the questions in the questionnaire and/or themes in the analyses.
Point 3: How the questionnaire survey was designed and conducted has not been well explained in the paper. For example, what kind of sampling method was adopted? How was the questionnaire designed? What were the instruments or scales used and why were they chosen?
Response 3: Thank you for your comment, and our reply is as follows: as for questionnaire design, on the one hand, according to the results of big data analysis, we selected some questions about public concern in the questionnaire, which from the hot themes that Weibo users. On the other hand, according to the establishment goals, development planning and other policy documents of national parks, we chosen some questions about public awareness of national parks. After repeated modification and improvement, we designed a questionnaire in three areas including "basic information, concern, and awareness". As for questionnaire conduct, because of the impact of the COVID-19, we mainly use online survey in this paper. First of all, we designed and published the questionnaire on the Questionnaire Star platform(https://www.wjx.cn/vj/w7UC10q.aspx), so that respondents can quickly and easily complete the questionnaire. Then, we distributed questionnaires to more potential investigators through WeChat. Finally, we summarized all the questionnaire results to the questionnaire star platform.
We have added the information as explained above (Lines 249-265, page 7).
Point 4: How were the data from different sources integrated? I would suggest the authors to present a clear strategy on the data collection and analysis for the research.
Response 4: We deeply appreciate your suggestion. This paper combines the big data approach of analyzing Weibo text and questionnaire survey data. On the one hand, we focus web crawler technology to analyze the information of Weibo users. Then, we constructs an LDA theme model to identify the types of topics users focus on. On the other hand, we carry out a nationwide online questionnaire survey. Besides, we further clarify the public's concern and awareness national parks through the analysis of the questionnaire data. Finally, these results are informative about the public’s concern and awareness of national parks.
We have added the information as explained above (Lines 180-186, page 5 and Figure 2, page 5).
Point 5: What was the LDA model chosen for the big data analysis? The LDA model has a lot of limitations. For example, it is not suitable for short, user-generated text. Stronger justifications are needed for the use of the LDA model.
Response 5: Thank you for underlining this deficiency. LDA has good data dimensionality reduction ability and model scalability,which is widely used in various text analysis tasks(Blei et al., 2003). As we know, the application of LDA model covers many fields, such as theme exploration, knowledge organization, academic evaluation, emotional analysis, and recommendation research. It is no deny that LDA model has some limitations in dealing with dynamic short texts (less than 10 texts). In order to eliminate this effect, we delete the less than 10 texts data when we preprocess the Weibo data. Besides, scholars at home and abroad have conducted a lot of research on social media data such as Weibo and Twitter by using LDA model. Therefore, based on previous studies, this paper will use LDA model to analyze the theme of Weibo data and clarify the public's concerns about national parks.
We have added the information as explained above (Lines 218-228, page 6).
Point 6: The findings of the survey were presented descriptively. I would expect some statistical tests were conducted on the survey data.
Response 6: Firstly, we tested the reliability and validity of the questionnaire. By analyzing the reliability and validity of the questionnaire, we find α=0.749＞0.7，which shows that the reliability of the questionnaire is very good. As shown in Table 5, the value of KMO is 0.880＞0.8, which indicatives that the questionnaire data is very effective. Further,we conducted a t-test on each question in the questionnaire, as Table A2, the results have significant statistical significance. Therefore,these results indicate that the distribution of respondents' results was reasonable. Then, we conducts a T-test on the questionnaire samples. The result show that p＜0.01 or 0.05，which indicates that the survey is reasonable.
We have added the test as explained above (Table 4 and 5, page 11 and Table A2, page 19 ).
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Overall the work is quite interesting but some revisions are needed:
1) Lines 2. “China ：” eliminate space.
2)
3) Lines 2. “big data” : “Big data”
4) The abstract is unclear;
5) The abstract is unclear; the research objectives and methodology should be better specified at the beginning of the paper. They look quite confusing.
6) Figures 2 and 6 are difficult to read; figure 5 is redundant.
7) Table 2 and Table A1 are excessively full and therefore they are confused.
8) Table A1. “gender” : “Gender”
9) Since the research objectives and methodology are not clearly explained at the beginning of the paper, it is difficult to appreciate the discussion and the conclusions.
Author Response
We are very grateful to your comments for the manuscript. Your comments and suggestions will play an important role in improving the quality of the manuscript. I have revised and improved this paper in strict accordance with your comments. All of your questions were answered one by one.
Point 1: Lines 2. “China ：” eliminate space.
Response 1: Thank you for the suggestion. We have eliminated space in lines 2.
Point 2: Lines 2. “big data” : “Big data”
Response 2: Thank you for the suggestion. We have revised “big data” to “Big data”.
Point 3: The abstract is unclear; the research objectives and methodology should be better specified at the beginning of the paper. They look quite confusing.
Response 3: We have rewrote the abstract according to the comment. As for the research objectives, because of a lack of public participation has limited the development of high-quality national parks in China. Therefore, the paper analyzes the current state of public concern and awareness of national parks, so as to find out suggestions for promoting public participation in national parks(Lines 167-172, figure 1). As for research methodology, the paper provides insight into this problem by combining Weibo and questionnaire survey data , then uses a combination of text mining, an Latent Dirichlet Allocation（LDA）theme model, and descriptive statistics. Besides, we reorganized the research method system of this paper(Lines 180-186, page 5 and figure 2)
Point 4: Figures 2 and 6 are difficult to read; figure 5 is redundant.
Response 4: Thank you for the suggestion. To improve the readability of Figure 2 and 6, we have improved the clarity of the picture. Besides, we have deleted figure 5.
Point 5: Table 2 and Table A1 are excessively full and therefore they are confused.
Response 5: Thank you for the suggestion. To make the table clearer, we have modified the format of Table 2 and Table A1.
Point 6: Table A1. “gender” : “Gender”
Response 6: Thank you for the suggestion. We have revised “gender” to “Gender” in Table A1.
Point 7: Since the research objectives and methodology are not clearly explained at the beginning of the paper, it is difficult to appreciate the discussion and the conclusions.
Response 7: Thank you for underlining this deficiency. This section was revised and modified according to the information showed in the work suggested. On the one hand, we have clarified the research objectives of the paper in “Introduction”, 1) Improving public concern and awareness of national parks; 2)Increasing public participation in national parks; 3) Promoting high-quality development of national parks(Figure 1). Then, we have clarified the research methodology of this paper in “Materials and Methods”(Lines180-188, Figure 2). Therefore, in the discussion and conclusions section, we analyzed the public's concern and awareness of the national parks through the analysis of Weibo data and questionnaire data.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have addressed my comments satisfactorily though I still think the language used in the manuscript needs polishing.
Author Response
Dear reviewer，
Re:
Manuscript ID: sustainability-2076306
Type of manuscript: Article
Title: Public Concern and Awareness of National Parks in China ：Evidence form Social Media Big Data and Questionnaire Data
Authors: Yaquan Dou, Changhao Wu, Youjun He *
Thank you for your letter and comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Public Concern and Awareness of National Parks in China ：Evidence form Social Media Big Data and Questionnaire Data ”(sustainability-2076306).
According to your comments，the manuscript was carefully edited by a native English speaker. Please find my revisions in the re-submitted files.
We would like to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised copy of the manuscript and we highly appreciate your time and consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Dou Yaquan
Reviewer 2 Report
After the revisions of the authors, the text is decidedly improved and more understandable.
Author Response
Dear reviewers,
Re:
Manuscript ID: sustainability-2076306
Type of manuscript: Article
Title: Public Concern and Awareness of National Parks in China ：Evidence form Social Media Big Data and Questionnaire Data
Authors: Yaquan Dou, Changhao Wu, Youjun He *
Thank you for your letter and comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Public Concern and Awareness of National Parks in China ：Evidence form Social Media Big Data and Questionnaire Data ”(sustainability-2076306).
The manuscript was carefully edited by a native English speaker，and we uploaded the file of the revised manuscript. Revisions in the text are shown using red highlight for additions. Please find my revisions in the re-submitted files.
We would like to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised copy of the manuscript and we highly appreciate your time and consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Dou Yaquan
