The Determinants of Walking Behavior before and during COVID-19 in Middle-East and North Africa: Evidence from Tabriz, Iran
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors
The issue raised in the manuscript is quite interesting and needed. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the article requires significant corrections and improvements:
- Abstract - I do not see in any information on why the research was carried out and who might need it; who can use the results of your research?
- I cannot agree with the division of determinants into 3 groups adopted by the authors: objective, subjective and socioeconomic. The division into objective and subjective deterimants is made according to one specific criterion. There should be no third group od the determinants. The separation of the third group: ”socioeconomic”, is a completely different criterion. The third group is incomparable to the two previous ones. This division affects the entire study. In my opinion, this is a significant mistake that needs to be corrected throughout the manuscript.
- The hypothesis is unfortunately trivial.
- Two different time frames for collecting the questionnaires were indicated: 1.06.2021-mid of July and 05.06.2021 – 15.07.2021.
- I do not see any answers to the research questions.
- Conclusions are too long and blurry. They should be listed.
Author Response
1. Abstract - I do not see in any information on why the research was carried out and who might need it; who can use the results of your research?
Response: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have added some parts and mentioned the necessity of doing this research in the Abstract. In addition, we outlined that who might need it and who can use these results.
2. I cannot agree with the division of determinants into 3 groups adopted by the authors: objective, subjective and socioeconomic. The division into objective and subjective determinants is made according to one specific criterion. There should be no third group od the determinants. The separation of the third group:” socioeconomic”, is a completely different criterion. The third group is incomparable to the two previous ones. This division affects the entire study. In my opinion, this is a significant mistake that needs to be corrected throughout the manuscript.
Response: We agree with this and have incorporated your suggestion throughout the manuscript.
3. The hypothesis is unfortunately trivial.
Response: Thank you for pointing this out. We considerably modified the existing hypotheses. In addition, we added new points to this section. In order to interpret the hypotheses, we included some explanations in discussion (6th paragraph) and conclusion.
4. Two different time frames for collecting the questionnaires were indicated: 1.06.2021-mid of July and 05.06.2021 – 15.07.2021.
Response: Agree. Thanks for pointing out. It was a minor mistake which we corrected it. The accurate date is: 05.06.2021 – 15.07.2021.
5. I do not see any answers to the research questions.
Response: Thank you for this suggestion. We answered the research questions in the Conclusion. First question was replied in the third paragraph of Conclusion starting with the word of “Second” and the second question was addressed in the fourth paragraph starting with the word of “Third”.
Reviewer 2 Report
The main contribution of this paper is to provide evidence on the changes in walking behaviour in Developing Countries. The paper is clearly written and the research methodology is sound. In my view, the conclusion needs to be expanded to explain the following:
a) How this paper adds to the current literature. Does it contradict some of the assumptions of former papers?
b) Discuss the specificity (if there is any) of walking behaviour in Developing countries with regard to Developed ones. Maybe it is also worthwhile mention that the developing countries under scrutiny may behave differently than other less developed countries such those of Subsaharian Africa.
Author Response
a) How this paper adds to the current literature. Does it contradict some of the assumptions of former papers?
Response: Thank you for pointing this out. We considerably changed the section of Conclusion. Accordingly, we mentioned the points that how this article adds to the current literature. This part has been located in the last paragraph of the Conclusion starting with the word of “Overall”. In addition, we compared the contradict results as well as consistent outputs of other researches in the second paragraph of Conclusion starting with the word of “First”.
b) Discuss the specificity (if there is any) of walking behaviour in Developing countries with regard to Developed ones. Maybe it is also worthwhile mention that the developing countries under scrutiny may behave differently than other less developed countries such those of Sub-Saharan Africa.
Response: Thank you for this suggestion. In the second paragraph of the Conclusion, we added a section and compared the results obtained from both developing (Sub-Saharan and others) and developed countries. The evidence from developed, developing and less developed nations showed that the findings of these results are highly localized. For example, while the result of our study contradicts other Mena countries and US cities, other samples from both developed and developing countries (Canada and Bangladesh) explicit the similar results with this study in walking increase during COVID-19 outbreak.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
Congratulations on your good work!
