How Does My Train Line Run? Elicitation of Six Information-Seeking Profiles of Regular Suburban Train Users

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article aims to identify the sources of information used by travelers and at what times they consult them, to classify passengers according to these activities. the authors conducted an online questionnaire to 258 regular users of commuter trains on a specific line (who have the same information material available at the stations).

The work is good in general, but the authors need to fix some details.

In the introduction, the authors should establish their contribution in this paper, for example:
The contribution of this work is described below:
A- first
B- second
C- third

try to keep the legend of the figure or table on the same page where it is located.

The results in 4.1.1 should be plotted on a pie chart to facilitate the visualization of the data.

Author Response

The work is good in general, but the authors need to fix some details.

In the introduction, the authors should establish their contribution in this paper, for example:

The contribution of this work is described below:

A- first

B- second

C- third

Thank you for this suggestion, which allowed us to clarify the contribution of our research in the introduction. We have tried to keep it short so as not to duplicate what is stated in section 2.4 

try to keep the legend of the figure or table on the same page where it is located.

Thank you for noticing this flaw. It has been corrected

The results in 4.1.1 should be plotted on a pie chart to facilitate the visualization of the data.

Thank you for your suggestion. Table 2 was transformed into a hierarchical tile chart. We hope that this graph significantly facilitates the visualization of main source combinations. As a graphical representation does not provide all the information that was originally included in the table, the table has been retained and placed in Appendix A.

Reviewer 2 Report

This research elaborates on the use of information at all the steps of a trip in normal and disturbed situations by regular users. This research provides sufficient analysis and links sociodemographic or travel characteristics to information-seeking behavior based on the discovered cluster.

Some issues:

1. In Figure 1, it’s better for the authors to give a legend of all the symbols presented.
2. Since women and upper socio-professional categories are overrepresented in your sample compared to the representative profile of PT users, will this result in a biased study on Line H?
3. In Table 3, axes 3 and 4 explain almost the same proportion, and the cumulative percentage of the first 3 axes is less than 40%. So why not choose the first 4 axes or more? Maybe the authors should print more results to let readers know where the elbow point occurs and to convince them that the information from the first 3 axes is sufficient to explain.

Author Response

1. In Figure 1, it’s better for the authors to give a legend of all the symbols presented.

Thank you for your suggestion. The figure has been completed with a legend and coloured

2. Since women and upper socio-professional categories are overrepresented in your sample compared to the representative profile of PT users, will this result in a biased study on Line H?

Thank you for your comment. We have added some thoughts on this bias in the discussion section from line 710 to line 713. In particular, we have explained that gender or socio-professional categories do not stand out in any of our categories, which suggests that they are not central influencing factors of traveller information usage behaviour.

3. In Table 3, axes 3 and 4 explain almost the same proportion, and the cumulative percentage of the first 3 axes is less than 40%. So why not choose the first 4 axes or more? Maybe the authors should print more results to let readers know where the elbow point occurs and to convince them that the information from the first 3 axes is sufficient to explain.

Thank you for your proposal. Table 3 (which is now Table 2) already shows that we should have retained only the first 2 factors because there is a significant drop between the first and second axis (this is where the elbow is located). This is why we have provided the details available between the 450 and 454 lines to explain our choice to retain an additional axis despite what the data in Table 2 shows.

Reviewer 3 Report

Author Response

Thanks a lot for your positive comment!

Reviewer 4 Report

This research aimed at describing the use of information at all the steps of a trip in normal and disturbed situations by regular users of a specific branch of one suburban train line and at linking this use to sociodemographic and trip characteristics.Overall, the paper is well written and organized with a proper length. The contributions as well as the quality are both good. There are some points that are not very clear and should be addressed in the revised version:

1. The innovation of this paper is not clear and it is difficult for readers to understand the main contributions of this paper. This part should be added in Introduction section.
2. The description of the existing work should be shorter in Introduction section. Furthermore, more descriptions of the proposed method are needed.
3. The reviewers recommend that more future work should be added on Conclusion Section. The Conclusion section should be shorter.

Author Response

1. The innovation of this paper is not clear and it is difficult for readers to understand the main contributions of this paper.  

2. The description of the existing work should be shorter in Introduction section. Furthermore, more descriptions of the proposed method are needed.

Thank you for your comment. The conclusion part has been lightened by moving an important part to the end of the discussion. The perspectives have been developed from line 740 to line 752.

3. The reviewers recommend that more future work should be added on Conclusion Section. The Conclusion section should be shorter.

Thank you for this suggestion, which allowed us to clarify the contribution of our research in the introduction. Since most of our introduction explains what traveller information is, and thus sets the framework for the article, we find it difficult to shorten this section. Nevertheless, we have made an effort to be concise. We have also added elements on the innovative character of the study (contribution of the study from line 68 to line 78) that are already exposed largely in section 2.4.

Extensive editing of English language and style required 

Thank you for your careful review. The article has been re-edited and corrected.

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

In a general way most of my comments were answered by the authors. My overall opinion about this paper is quite good. The manuscript is well written and acceptable for publishing