An Exploratory Attitude and Belief Analysis of Ecotourists’ Destination Image Assessments and Behavioral Intentions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The first sentence in the Abstract should briefly introduce the relationship between image assessment and behavioural intentions. Additionally, it would help if you described the methodology better (namely, the sampling process).

In the Introduction, you must provide basic information about why your research is necessary, state the research goal(s), and scientific contribution. Furthermore, I suggest you add a literature review chapter where you will provide your research background.

Scale development is a procedure that includes different steps, and you need to explain this process. There are various references that you can use for this part. Furthermore, you need to provide details regarding sampling and data analysis. Additionally, if you want to develop a new scale, testing it on a sample of 64 tourists is not acceptable. This sample size is more appropriate for pilot testing(s) but not for scale development. Statisticians are even against using percentages if the sample has fewer than 100 responders.

Regarding factors, it is highly recommended that each factor be constructed of at least three items. Therefore, researchers repeat scale testing a few times before testing it on a bigger sample.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

In the first instance, we would like to kindly thank the different recommendations and revisions suggested for the project, which we have taken into account as follows:

 

• The first sentence in the Abstract should briefly introduce the relationship between image assessment and behavioural intentions. Additionally, it would help if you described the methodology better (namely, the sampling process).

R/: A brief introduction of the results found regarding image relationships and behavioral intentions has been included in the abstract being direct and indirect positive predictors. The methodology clarifies that an invitation to participate has been made to the associations of professional birdwatchers in the main rural areas of the region, which are in charge of distributing the survey through a virtual  and face to face format. In addition to this, in-depth interviews have been carried out with experts in tourism and bird watching, to develop the scale proposal.

• In the Introduction, you must provide basic information about why your research is necessary, state the research goal(s), and scientific contribution. Furthermore, I suggest you add a literature review chapter where you will provide your research background.

R/. At the end of the introduction, information on the objectives of the study and its contribution has been included, in addition to including a literature section at the beginning of the materials and methods section.

• Scale development is a procedure that includes different steps, and you need to explain this process. There are various references that you can use for this part. Furthermore, you need to provide details regarding sampling and data analysis. Additionally, if you want to develop a new scale, testing it on a sample of 64 tourists is not acceptable. This sample size is more appropriate for pilot testing(s) but not for scale development. Statisticians are even against using percentages if the sample has fewer than 100 responders.

R/. In the methodology, greater clarity has been made about the qualitative and quantitative stage of the study, the way in which the fieldwork processes and data analysis were developed. The development of a pilot is clarified by the size of the sample, the test will be carried out with a statistically significant sample in the following study.

• Regarding factors, it is highly recommended that each factor be constructed of at least three items. Therefore, researchers repeat scale testing a few times before testing it on a bigger sample.

R/. This recommendation will be taken into account for the following exercises to test the scale in large samples.

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is new and interesting enough to justify publication.

The connection is made between the subject of the paper and that of the previous studies, making bibliographical references from the specialized literature.

The research methodology is adequate, being explained in detail.

Recent bibliographic references are limited.

Considering the above, I recommend the authors to consider in the future articles the papers considered relevant, especially those in the main flow of publications and to use more figures and tables, for a clearer highlighting of the results.

 

 

 

The statements in the conclusions are not supported by the results. The explanations in the final part of the conclusions relate more to the theoretical part and not to the results of the research carried out. In this sense, a reformulation of the conclusions is necessary, without citing some theoretical works.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

In the first instance, we would like to kindly thank the different recommendations and revisions suggested for the project, which we have taken into account as follows:

Recent bibliographic references are limited. Considering the above, I recommend the authors to consider in the future articles the papers considered relevant, especially those in the main flow of publications and to use more figures and tables, for a clearer highlighting of the results.

 

R/. We greatly appreciate the recommendation and it will be taken into account for the following research exercises.

  

The statements in the conclusions are not supported by the results. The explanations in the final part of the conclusions relate more to the theoretical part and not to the results of the research carried out. In this sense, a reformulation of the conclusions is necessary, without citing some theoretical works.

 

R/. The conclusions section has been reformulated by adding a practical explanation of the results found without citing the theoretical sections.

 

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The article is very well structured and understandable.

Congratulations to the authors.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Comments: The article is very well structured and understandable. Congratulations to the authors.

 

R/. We would like to kindly thank the different recommendations and revisions suggested for the project.

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors, 

The topic and research design looks fine, but the issue is you conducted the research in two phases regarding methodology, but I cannot see the reflection of the first part on the second one. 

In the text on page 3, you need to correct factor 5 to factor 3 (line 121). The developed scales are totally different from the quantitative sections, and it cannot be seen how the scale of Table 4 showed up after Table 3.  Absolutely there must be a relationship between. 

Also, add a model to show the items measured in the quantitative part. 

In addition, it is better not to put all the sections including future research, limitations, and implications in one section like the conclusion. 

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

In the first instance, we would like to kindly thank the different recommendations and revisions suggested for the project, which we have taken into account as follows:

• The topic and research design looks fine, but the issue is you conducted the research in two phases regarding methodology, but I cannot see the reflection of the first part on the second one.

R/: We have made a greater clarity regarding the methodological process and the analysis, from the characteristics of the sample and the processes developed in both phases. For the qualitative methodological phase, the results can be found in the scale development section and in the quantitative phase, which would be the pilot test (scale developed of in-depth interviews), is found in point 3.

• In the text on page 3, you need to correct factor 5 to factor 3 (line 121). The developed scales are totally different from the quantitative sections, and it cannot be seen how the scale of Table 4 showed up after Table 3. Absolutely there must be a relationship between.

R/. We have corrected the number of the factor in table 3. Likewise, we added an appendix 1 where the complete measurement scale is presented, which includes the new items (developed in table 3 as a result of the interviews) and the complete scale (which appears in Table 4) already with all the variables, there you can identify their coding and number of items for each factor. Also in table 4 factor have been mark with their respective codes.

• Also, add a model to show the items measured in the quantitative part.

R: In appendix 1 you can find the different items (complete model) that have been measured for each of the factors in the quantitative part.

In addition, it is better not to put all the sections including future research, limitations, and implications in one section like the conclusion.

R/. Conclusion and discussion section were modified, and limitations and implications were separated.

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Theoretical background should be a separate chapter.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

In the first instance, we would like to kindly thank the different recommendations and revisions suggested for the project, which we have taken into account as follows:

• Theoretical background should be a separate chapter.

R/: Theoretical background was separated from methodology.

Thank you.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors, 

Thanks for enriching the content and improvements. 

Please, consider this issue that still there are some ambiguities regarding items development :

Page 4:  After the interviews, a categorization and coding process was carried out, which results in a scale of 15 additional items for destination image measurement focused on bird watchers.

Page 5:  After the analysis of the interviews, three new items were determined for Factor 1 (Natural/environmental characteristics) relating to the diversity of birds and contamination conditions of the territory. Nine new items for Factor 2 (Tourist facilities/infrastructure) related, among other things, to specialized guidance, bilingualism (in this case, Span-220 ish-English), and access to technology. Finally, three new items for Factor 5 (Social environment/travel environment) related to access to clean water and the capacity to respond 222 to emergencies.

For the mentioned pages, you need to clarify the items or add them to a table!!! what are the first 15 items, and what are the added ones!!!!

Please try to mention the place of each item, the added one, etc. 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

In the first instance, we would like to kindly thank the different recommendations and revisions suggested for the project, which we have taken into account as follows:

• After the interviews, a categorization and coding process was carried out, which results in a scale of 15 additional items for destination image measurement focused on bird watchers.

R/: We have made a greater clarity on the section characteristics of the sample.

Page 5:  After the analysis of the interviews, three new items were determined for Factor 1 (Natural/environmental characteristics) relating to the diversity of birds and contamination conditions of the territory. Nine new items for Factor 2 (Tourist facilities/infrastructure) related, among other things, to specialized guidance, bilingualism (in this case, Span-220 ish-English), and access to technology. Finally, three new items for Factor 5 (Social environment/travel environment) related to access to clean water and the capacity to respond 222 to emergencies. For the mentioned pages, you need to clarify the items or add them to a table!!! what are the first 15 items, and what are the added ones!!!!

R/: We have added appendix 1 (modified) where you can show the new items (project results) in each factor with their location and the items extracted from the literature of already validated scales, which consolidates the final scale proposed for bird watching. New items and those already established by literature are clarified.

Thank you.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx