Sustainability of Food Heritage in Birthday Rituals

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In the work, the effect of traditional food in birthday rituals on the cultural heritage of South Koreans is investigagted. The perceived female, the perceived behavioral control, and the subjective norm are three important factors.  The first two factors have a greater impact in the elderly group than in the young group. The contribution of three facttors is discussed  in terms of cultural sustainability, TPB and the managerial implications for policymakers. Before the publication, the manuscript should be revised as the following:

1. In Line 3 and 4, the affiliation is presented in a wrong way.

2. In Line 82, "Literature Review" should be changed to "Present study". In the section, the keys and the logic should be clearly summarized, which is the base for your further study.

3. In Line 349, what is the “H5”?

4. In Line 430, Table I, the importance of every question is quantified.

5. In conclusion, the importance of the perceived behavioral control, the perceived female role and the subjective norm should be quantified.

6. The contributions of these three factors should be quantified.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Extensive editing of English language is required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

Thanks for your submission of this interesting topic and manuscript. The manuscript adds to the literature and has great opportunity for publications. However, there are some rooms for improvement as some parts are not clear enough and would benefits form some revision. Here are some suggestions for improvements:

·         Please do not use general assumptions in research without supporting references. There is no doubt that cultural heritage is important for sustainability. However, when you mention (in the abstract or in the introduction) that it is the fourth pillar of sustainability, you need to cite a reference of this please.

·          Reference number [5] used in your introduction to support your argument about research gap is outdated. It is published 2014, i.e. 10 years ago; however, a simple search on google scholar could show many updated references on intangible cultural heritage with linkage on sustainability.

·         I like your discussion of the literature review and the development of research hypotheses using TPB framework, despite only one part of the theory was adopted in this research.

·         Please discuss how you ensured the validity and reliability of the data collected online with support from professional survey company.

·         I suggest you provide the profile of respondents in table.

·         The methods and software used for data analysis. Hierarchal regression analysis is not enough for your model. Please considers using SEM analysis for better data analysis.

·         I suggest you split the implications of the study from the limitation and conclusion.  

Best wishes with your revision

Comments on the Quality of English Language

overall, English is readable 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

An interesting study with some limitations (as already mentioned by the authors). Since the study is conducted in the home country, i.e. Korea, data on how migrants behave in the USA is not necessary. It would certainly be interesting to investigate (in a future) how this type of cultural heritage is preserved by migrants.

There are some typewriting mistakes where an em-dash and not a tilde should be used (e.g. in lines 106, 108 and 109).

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Extensive editing of English language is required.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of English language must be improved.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. Also, for the reviewer's convenience, we have included a supplementary manuscript that contains the track changes from the English editing service we used. The main document does not display the tracked changes in red. Please take a look at the supplementary manuscript if you'd like to review the specific edits made during the English editing process. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for addressing my earlier comments. despite some points were not addressed such as data analysis technique but the manuscript could be published in its current form. Best wishes 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English language is okay

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Extensive editing of English language must be required.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Extensive editing of English language must be required.