Social Distance with Tourists in U.S. Counties with the Highest Historical Numbers of Reported COVID-19 Cases

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

A very interesting presentation of the issue. In the opinion of the reviewer, it would be worth paying more attention in similar studies to the aspect of the impact of the geographical origin of tourists and its impact on the reactions of residents towards tourists.

Author Response

Please see attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Integrating the cognitive appraisal theory and affect theory exchange structural model was tested examining the degree to which residents' perceptions of COVID-19 precautionary measures explains emotions directed towards tourists and willingness to engage in shared behaviors with tourists.

1. The authors must write hypothesis one by one not two hypothesis in one (H1-2). Write H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7, H8, H9, H10, H11, H12.

2. All hypotheses need to have arguments from other authors who have in the past written about each construct.

3. Authors must show the scale measurement in the paper with all variables.

4. Authors must show in a table a sample description. Why did you do only an online survey? Did you have all age categories?

5. Measurement model results in Table 1 must have written all variables. (what is IT1... MI7)

6. In the Discussion part you need to have strong arguments from other authors.

7. The Conclusion must be better written. Why were the hypothesis H1 and H7 wasn't supported, explain.

There is a possibility of plagiarism from www.mdpi.com, you should check it out. It seems like the part of the paper was already published.

 

 

English language is a good quality.

Author Response

Please see attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

I checked it in detail and here are my comments:

+ very interesting topic
- the paper is largely descriptive

- great part of the research is based on very dubious information about the tourist importance of some destinations. For example, source or literature number five looks like some popular tourist advertising website, not official statistical data such as number of tourist beds, arrivals, or overnights.

- Authors should largely explain their choice of the most important US counties in terms of tourism (the most visited counties by domestic or international tourists).

- The proposed number of hypotheses is absolutely too large and unacceptable. It should be reduced to three max.

- the Introduction needs to provide a stronger theoretical rationale and background information for the paper
- the Literature review needs to be more critical. The paper is on COVID-19 disease, probably you have to connect it with the concept of pandemic influences on tourism as well.
- analysis of results is quite descriptive
- you mention that questionnaires were undertaken, but the text provides little information on how this research strategy informed the findings.

The number of respondents in some counties (LA, Bronx, for example) is definitely insufficient for this type of research.
- findings need a stronger discussion in the context of prior literature
- the conclusion must elaborate in greater detail on the paper's theoretical contribution, managerial implications, limitations, and future research directions
- besides the undisputed applied value of the paper, its theoretical contribution needs to be stronger.

No comment

Author Response

Please see attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors must show the structural model and explain it in the conclusion.

Author Response

Please see the attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf