Effects of COVID-19 on Travel Behavior and Mode Choice: A Case Study for the Bangkok Metropolitan Area

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Paper presents interesting results regarding travel behaviour and choices during pandemic. However, I suggest several additions to make the paper overall better:

- state the contribution of your research at the end of the introduction chapter.

- at the discussion of conclusions chapter, state the limitations of your study, as well as the possible future applications. How can your research be applied?

- list of literature should be expanded. Wikipedia should not be common source in scientific papers.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper studies the changes in citizens' travel and working from home in Bangkok, Thailand before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. It has sufficient data, detailed research contents, and certain research results.

See below for some detailed comments:

1. There is a lot of content in Table 1. It would be better to summarize before displaying.

2. Some introductions of the research methods in 2.2 are too brief. It is suggested to explain some significant methods in more detail.

3. There are too many results in Chapter 3. Which of the most important results is?

4. How is the change in travel behavior in Bangkok compared with other cities worldwide due to the COVID-19 pandemic? What are the characteristics of Bangkok in this research?

5. Although the content of this article is relatively rich, the overall structure is not clear enough. The author did not introduce the writing logic of this article at the beginning, making it difficult to read and understand some parts of the article. For example, the title of Chapter 4 is Discussion, but it is not clear what is discussed in this chapter.

6. Some grammatical errors still need to be modified.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Reviewer 3 Report

Topic of the paper is interesting and up-to-date.

Structure is well.One exeption - subchapter 2.2. In my opinion the chapter should be connected. Current version is too fragmented.

Literature review looks good, but why Authors told about Poland (line 41) and next did not put Polish survey results to table 1?

Lines 111-116. Auhtors should describe in more deeply way sample size deretmining process.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf