The Role of Big Five Personality Traits in Explaining Pedestrian Anger Expression

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Need and novelty of this study should be explained

Elaborate literature review is expected to identify gap in knowledge

How sample size was derived? how authors decided that collected sample is representative?

Sec. 3.2 O.R should be replaced by OR

Applications and limitations of this study should be mentioned

Author Response

Please refer to the attached response statement. Thank you. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. Need more detailed discussion particularly related to the Big Five Personality, The CFA method, and the formulation Logistic regression used in this paper.

2. Need to summarize in one Table related to the content of the questionnaire, how the sample has been drawn from the population?

3. As for the result of logistic regression, it should be explained first how the distribution and setting of the endogenous and exogenous variables are used in the model? 

Author Response

Please refer to the attached response statement. Thank you. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

1. The literature review appears weak. The authors need to include more recent studies on pedestrian behaviour in their introduction section.

2. There are some incidences of inappropriate citations - Esmaeli et al. (2021) should be in the number format.

3. The research motivation is not clear. I would suggest the authors to provide a brief table summarizing the past research - sample size, aims, key findings, and limitations, based on which the authors can highlight their research motivation and what research gaps they aim to address with the help of the present study.

4. It will be helpful to the other researchers if the authors provide the questionnaire in the appendix.

5. The authors need to be mention the approval/reference ID of the study from the ethics committee. The authors need to include the details about informed consent, compensation, etc.

6. Why did the authors choose to do logistic regression analysis? Proper justification is required.

7. R2 values are quite low - what do they tell about the model efficiency?

8. The limitations of the study are missing. Please include a limitations and future research section in the end.

9. Separate discussion and conclusions. List out the key conclusions in bullets for easy readability and takeaway by the readers.

10. In the end, create a subsection on practical applications where the authors can highlight the policy implications of the findings.

Author Response

Please refer to the attached response statement. Thank you. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Authors have significantly enhanced the quality of their manuscript. I do not have any further comments.