Spatiotemporal Characteristics and Factors Influencing Urban Tourism Market Network in Western China: Taking Chengdu as an Example

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I appreciate the opportunity to review this manuscript. I find the topic interesting with potentially good sets of implications to derive from. I hope the authors would find my comments below helpful.

The introduction, along with other areas of the manuscript, would benefits from more specific elaborations. For example, in the second paragraph, the authors stated that the impact of the Internet-based leisure tourism market on pre-order consumer search was less than expected. However, this is just a broad statement and it would be more helpful to readers if the authors would point out the specifics of how and why. Similarly, when stating that something is important, it is crucial to also explain why an how they are important. These specifics would later on help when the authors discuss findings and implications.

Admittedly, I am not familiar with the methodology deployed in this study. Still, I found the explanation thorough.

The discussions are general and to a certain extent predictable. Thus, I strongly encourage the authors to improve on the articulation of the findings to highlight the implications of the findings.

Furthermore, the authors should also try to discuss how destinations outside of Chengdu or even China would benefit from the findings of this present study to help further strengthen the originality and contributions.

 

Lastly, I feel the manuscript would still be tightened. The authors may consider removing discussions that are not directly relevant to the study and removing repetitive arguments.

Overall, the manuscript is well-written. However, some areas can be tightened and shortened.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and professional advice. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request, we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Meanwhile, the manuscript had be reviewed and edited by language services of MDPI. We hope that our work can be improved again. Furthermore, we would like to show the details as follows:

1. The introduction, along with other areas of the manuscript, would benefits from more specific elaborations. For example, in the second paragraph, the authors stated that the impact of the Internet-based leisure tourism market on pre-order consumer search was less than expected. However, this is just a broad statement and it would be more helpful to readers if the authors would point out the specifics of how and why. Similarly, when stating that something is important, it is crucial to also explain why an how they are important. These specifics would later on help when the authors discuss findings and implications.

The author’s answer: We have revised the sentence in the article. In the first part of the article, we provided a detailed explanation of some scholars' research, removed some inaccurate statements, and provided a detailed introduction to the significance of our research.

2. The discussions are general and to a certain extent predictable. Thus, I strongly encourage the authors to improve on the articulation of the findings to highlight the implications of the findings. Furthermore, the authors should also try to discuss how destinations outside of Chengdu or even China would benefit from the findings of this present study to help further strengthen the originality and contributions.

The author’s answer: We have focused on modifying the discussion section. Admittedly, the discussion lacks depth, and we attempt to further explore the significance of this study for other cities in China and even the world, highlighting the implications of the research findings.” To summarize the findings presented in this work, tourist cities should transform network traffic into effective economic growth.”

3. Lastly, I feel the manuscript would still be tightened. The authors may consider removing discussions that are not directly relevant to the study and removing repetitive arguments.

The author’s answer: We have removed the content and images that are not strongly related to the research content and are repetitive in the discussion, making the content of the manuscript more concise.

Thank you very much for your attention and time . Look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Chen-hao Xue

30 Apr 2023

College of Geography and Environmental Science, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730070, China

Tel:86-15009315199

E-mail: xuechenhaovip@126.com

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

It is suggested that the authors:

Clearly define the question that guides the research.

End the introduction by mentioning how the document is structured.

Remove figure 9 from the discussion, as it is not clear linkage of the figure to what is presented in the discussion.

Move points 4.2 and 4.3 to the conclusions.

Strengthen point 4.1 (which becomes point 4) with comparison with other similar studies.

Mention future studies to be developed based on the work presented (in the conclusion).

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and professional advice. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request, we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Meanwhile, the manuscript had be reviewed and edited by language services of MDPI. We hope that our work can be improved again. Furthermore, we would like to show the details as follows:

1. Clearly define the question that guides the research.

The author’s answer: We have revised the abstract and Introduction of the article.” Urban tourism network attention is an important scale for measuring the competitiveness of the urban tourism industry, tourism attraction, and cultural soft power.”” as well as discusses how tourism cities can increase network attention, thus improving the competitiveness of urban cyberspace and developing soft power.”

2. End the introduction by mentioning how the document is structured.

The author’s answer: At the end of the “Introduction” section, the structure of the paper was added,” In the second part of this article, an overview of the research area, research methods, and research data sources are introduced. The third and fourth parts analyze the spatiotemporal characteristics and influencing factors of Chengdu's tourism network attention. Finally, the influencing mechanism is deeply explored, and suggestions for urban tourism marketing strategies are proposed.”

3.Remove figure 9 from the discussion, as it is not clear linkage of the figure to what is presented in the discussion. Move points 4.2 and 4.3 to the conclusions.Strengthen point 4.1 (which becomes point 4) with comparison with other similar studies. Mention future studies to be developed based on the work presented (in the conclusion).

The author’s answer: We have modified the discussion section, deleted Figure 9, and included “4.2 management inspiration” in the conclusion section, while also strengthening the explanation of the discussion section. But we have referred to other literature and limited our research to the discussion section, so that we can better clarify the focus of our future research. Do you think this is appropriate?

Thank you very much for your attention and time . Look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours sincerely

Chen-hao Xue

30 Apr 2023

College of Geography and Environmental Science, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730070, China

Tel:86-15009315199

E-mail: xuechenhaovip@126.com

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The article submitted for review is extremely interesting. It shows how data from the Internet can be used to analyze the tourist market. It is worth using this data, the acquisition of which does not require such effort as survey research.

The data from the web can be used for a broad analysis of tourism and tourists. Such analyzes can then be used in the work of tourism enterprises or in tourism administration and designing tourism policy.

My only remark is a request to explain what national A-level scenic spots are, and the importance of the A5 or A4 rating, because readers from outside this area have no idea about it.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and professional advice. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request, we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Meanwhile, the manuscript had be reviewed and edited by language services of MDPI. We hope that our work can be improved again. Furthermore, we would like to show the details as follows:

1. explain what national A-level scenic spots are, and the importance of the A5 or A4 rating, because readers from outside this area have no idea about it.

The author’s answer: I am very sorry for the confusion caused by the article. It is because we did not explain the concept of A-level scenic spots clearly. We explained the concept of 5A level scenic spots in China in the "2.1. Study Area" section of the article.” Grade A scenic spot is the quality level of China's tourist attraction, which is divided into five levels. Among them, 5A is the highest level of China's tourist attraction, rep-resenting China's world-class tourist attractions.”

In addition, we have made detailed revisions to the structure of the paper based on other reviewers, especially the introduction and discussion , to make the paper more reasonable.

Thank you very much for your attention and time . Look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours sincerely

Chen-hao Xue

30 Apr 2023

College of Geography and Environmental Science, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730070, China

Tel:86-15009315199

E-mail: xuechenhaovip@126.com

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

The authors have taken up an interesting and current topic, and the data sources and methods of their analysis are very impressive. However, it seems to me necessary to present and discuss the purpose of the study more clearly and precisely, because I had many doubts about it.

There are quite a few conclusions, solutions and recommendations in the "Discussion" section that do not come directly from your research. I think they should be included in the "Conclusions" section.

Other remarks are in comments in the text.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and professional advice. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request, we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Meanwhile, the manuscript had be reviewed and edited by language services of MDPI. We hope that our work can be improved again. Furthermore, we would like to show the details as follows:

1. However, it seems to me necessary to present and discuss the purpose of the study more clearly and precisely, because I had many doubts about it.

The author’s answer: We have revised the abstract and Introduction of the article to make the research purpose clearer article. ”Urban tourism network attention is an important scale for measuring the competitiveness of the urban tourism industry, tourism attraction, and cultural soft power.” ”as well as discusses how tourism cities can increase network attention, thus improving the competitiveness of urban cyberspace and developing soft power.” “Therefore, based on the time series change, spatial structure change, and time section change of the Baidu Index's network attention of Chengdu's tourist market, this study reveals the spatiotemporal characteristics and change within the network attention of the tourist market and analyzes the factors influencing the change，and provide reference for the marketing and cultural soft power construction of Chengdu's customer source market.”

2. There are quite a few conclusions, solutions and recommendations in the "Discussion" section that do not come directly from your research. I think they should be included in the "Conclusions" section.

The author’s answer: Frankly, in the “Discussion” section, We have referred to other literature. And we have modified the discussion section, deleted Figure 9, and included “4.2 management inspiration” in the conclusion section, while also strengthening the explanation of the discussion section. But we have referred to other literature and limited our research to the discussion section, so that we can better clarify the focus of our future research.

3. Other remarks are in comments in the text.

The author’s answer: We greatly appreciate your efforts in reviewing our manuscript. We have made individual revisions to the manuscript based on your annotations. We have made the research objectives clearer and the keywords more precise. In the preface, we have also made modifications to some unclear statements. In the results section, we modified the representation of the graph” showing a roughly “∩”distribution trend”, but in section 3.1.2 Seasonal characteristics "and" Table 2 ", We have explained these data, based on the seasonal concentration index to measure network attention Chengdu tourism’s network attention index during 2011–2021 was 8.38, 6.80, 8.15, 6.55, 5.25, 3.46, 4.18, 4.55, 12.73, 14.25, and 11.21, the greater value is. this implies that the distribution of tourist’s network attention in to Chengdu is large and seasonal. G’ refers to the concentration coefficient of potential tourists' attention in Chengdu’s tourist source market. The larger the value, the more concentrated the tourists' attention and vice versa.

In addition, due to the automatic feature of compressing images in Microsoft Word, the images are not clear. We have modified Figures 7 and 8 and clearly expressed the image names. Sincerely speaking, we have learned a lot from your annotations. Thank you!

Thank you very much for your attention and time . Look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Chen-hao Xue

30 Apr 2023

College of Geography and Environmental Science, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730070, China

Tel:86-15009315199

E-mail: xuechenhaovip@126.com

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 5 Report

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to Sustainability. 

 The paper presents some interesting contextual data but reconfirms existing knowledge and relations in a new context. Given its limited new contribution to the field, I have to reject it.

 

The title: Spatiotemporal Characteristics and Factors Influencing Urban Tourism Market Network in Western China: Taking Chengdu as an Example.

 

Was the target Chengdu or Western China?

It is a big mistake for a study.

 

From the manuscript, lots of figures were focused on all of China,

So....the purpose is unclear.

 

 Moderate editing of English language

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and professional advice. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request, we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Meanwhile, the manuscript had be reviewed and edited by language services of MDPI. We hope that our work can be improved again. Furthermore, we would like to show the details as follows:

1. The paper presents some interesting contextual data but reconfirms existing knowledge and relations in a new context. Given its limited new contribution to the field, I have to reject it.

The author’s answer: Sincerely thank you for your opinion. Our paper did not indeed 'shock the universe', and the introduction section of the original manuscript did not clearly state the novelty and importance; In view of this, we have strengthened the introduction section and emphasized innovation,and clarified the research purpose .“There are few relevant studies on medium and long-term inter-annual evolution and corresponding influencing factors. Additionally, only a few studies have examined the network attention of the tourist source market in western cities of China, such as Chengdu. “ “In the era of mass tourism and the information technology revolution, the Internet has become the primary source of obtaining information regarding a tourist destination. Tourism cities and scenic spots also use big data to analyze changes in tourists' attention in the source market to improve their marketing effectiveness. Therefore, based on the time series change, spatial structure change, and time section change of the Baidu Index's network attention of Chengdu's tourist market, this study reveals the spatiotemporal characteristics and change within the network attention of the tourist market and analyzes the factors influencing the change，and provide reference for the marketing and cultural soft power construction of Chengdu's customer source market.”

2. Was the target Chengdu or Western China?

It is a big mistake for a study.

From the manuscript, lots of figures were focused on all of China,

So....the purpose is unclear.

The author’s answer: Chengdu is an important tourist destination in western China. In the era of the internet, potential tourists from various regions have conducted extensive searches for tourism strategies, tourist attractions, and weather information in Chengdu, which has generated search data. Based on this data, we analyze the spatiotemporal pattern and influencing factors of tourist sources' attention to Chengdu's tourism network. And we want to provide some reference for tourism cities in western China to enhance their tourism attractiveness and soft power in cyberspace through a case study of Chengdu. We apologize for not being able to explain our statement clearly.

Thank you very much for your attention and time . Look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Chen-hao Xue

30 Apr 2023

College of Geography and Environmental Science, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730070, China

Tel:86-15009315199

E-mail: xuechenhaovip@126.com

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 5 Report

I have rejected it last time, so I apologize.

No

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and professional advice. Based on your suggestion and request, we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript once more. We hope that our work can be improved again. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx