Research on the Relationship between the Individual Characteristics of Electric Bike Riders and Illegal Speeding Behavior: A Questionnaire-Based Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study’s objective is to study the relationship between the individual characteristics of electric bike riders and illegal speeding behavior through a questionnaire. Overall, the paper is well written and well structured, and the methodology is sufficiently explained. The objectives are not clearly stated and need strengthening though. The measures and analysis methodology were selected with adequate explanation. Finally, the results extracted from this study are quite interesting but not adequately discussed.

The following improvements are proposed:

You could distinguish more clearly, strengthen and highlight the last paragraph of your introduction, as you present your objective. Which are your research questions? Which are the gaps in the literature that you are trying to fill in with your study? You have to be more specific and clear. Your sample is 350 questionnaires. How did you end up with this number? How could you prove the sample’s strength? Discussion is actually missing. You should discuss your findings. Try to explain if they answer your research questions. This section needs a lot to be strengthened. You spend a lot of pages to explain the methodology and just a few lines to discuss the results. You need to summarize the major findings and conclude.

Author Response

This study’s objective is to study the relationship between the individual characteristics of electric bike riders and illegal speeding behavior through a questionnaire. Overall, the paper is well written and well structured, and the methodology is sufficiently explained. The objectives are not clearly stated and need strengthening though. The measures and analysis methodology were selected with adequate explanation. Finally, the results extracted from this study are quite interesting but not adequately discussed.

The following improvements are proposed:

You could distinguish more clearly, strengthen and highlight the last paragraph of your introduction, as you present your objective. Which are your research questions? Which are the gaps in the literature that you are trying to fill in with your study? Many thanks for your comment. The research questions and the gaps in the literature was added on Line 90-98, Page 2-3. You have to be more specific and clearer. Your sample is 350 questionnaires. How did you end up with this number? How could you prove the sample’s strength? Double thanks for your comment. Through the statistical processing of the survey data, a statistical result of the personal characteristics of the e-bike riders is obtained. the disaggregate theory was used to analyze the personal traffic behavior of the traveler, the data creation and calibration models are based on personal data. For the future work, the sample size can be further increased. The reliability and validity tests were used for the sample’s strength, please find the detailed information on Line 128-133, Page 3.  Discussion is actually missing. You should discuss your findings. Try to explain if they answer your research questions. This section needs a lot to be strengthened. Many thanks for your comment. We have added Discussion Chapter in the text on Line 203, Line 235-241, Line 261-266, Line 274-276, Line 344-339, Page 6-11.  You spend a lot of pages to explain the methodology and just a few lines to discuss the results. You need to summarize the major findings and conclude. This is a good point. We have added two main findings in the Conclusion Chapter, Line 376-385, Page 11-12.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The literature review well describes the state of art referred to the analysed topic. The approach is well explained and the example allows readers to understand the whole problem, and also to replicate it.
Despite the paper is well presented and structured, I suggest introducing the main results in the abstract in brief, so that it is possible to have an idea about the overall ones.
Moreover, the introduction, in the presented form, is quite negligible. I suggest
restructuring it explaining in-depth the maintenance problem.
The English form has to be revised for the presence of some typos.
The paper can be accepted with the minor changes that I suggested above.

 

Author Response

The literature review well describes the state of art referred to the analyzed topic. The approach is well explained and the example allows readers to understand the whole problem, and also to replicate it.

Despite the paper is well presented and structured, I suggest introducing the main results in the abstract in brief, so that it is possible to have an idea about the overall ones. Thank you very much for your helpful comment. We have modified the ABSTRACT following your suggestion, see Line 25-29, Page 1. Moreover, the introduction, in the presented form, is quite negligible. I suggest that restructuring it explaining in-depth the maintenance problem. This is a good point. We have added the purpose of this study in INTRODUCTION Chapter, see Line 90-98, Page 2-3. The English form has to be revised for the presence of some typos. Many thanks for your comment, a thorough proofreading and language revision was made to improve the readability of the manuscript. The editorial certificate is as follows.

    4. The paper can be accepted with the minor changes that I suggested above.

Double thanks, according to the reviewer’s comments, we have revised all the questions above.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf