Review Reports - The Importance of Landscape during Long-Distance Running Activity

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I thank the authors for having had the opportunity to review their manuscript, which correlates the topic of physical well-being activity with the perception of the landscape.

In the introductory section some reference could be made to the theme of green infrastructure which combines slow mobility in natural environments to improve the well-being of communities. Most likely some of the research routes will also be green infrastructure.

The proposed approach, based on data from anonymous questionnaires, is clear and well structured, however in the materials and methods section it could be useful to make a brief presentation of the case study, which is instead mainly addressed in the results section.

Instead, the discussion section could be enriched with policy guidelines to improve the current situation, or define priorities that emerged from the study.

The conclusions paragraph should be rewritten avoiding bullet points.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I recommend a review of the manuscript by a native speaker

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments.

Our responses are below, the changed text is pink

R: I thank the authors for having had the opportunity to review their manuscript, which correlates the topic of physical well-being activity with the perception of the landscape.

OUR ANSWER: The Introduction chapter has been supplemented.

R: The proposed approach, based on data from anonymous questionnaires, is clear and well structured, however in the materials and methods section it could be useful to make a brief presentation of the case study, which is instead mainly addressed in the results section.

OUR ANSWER: In part 2, "Methods," and in part 3, "Results," subsections were created dedicated to the specific Case Study: the Podkarpacki Ultramarathon. Detailed information about the analysed route has been included in these subsections.

R: Instead, the discussion section could be enriched with policy guidelines to improve the current situation, or define priorities that emerged from the study.

OUR ANSWER:This issue was discussed at the end of the Discussion chapter.

R: The conclusions paragraph should be rewritten avoiding bullet points.

OUR ANSWER:It has been corrected.

R: Comments on the Quality of English Language: I recommend a review of the manuscript by a native speaker.

OUR ANSWER: The text was corrected by native.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript “The importance of landscape during long-distance running activity” presents an interesting research that studies the correlation between landscape and the activation of running. Multiple quantitative methods including spatial analysis and statistical methods such as hypothesis testing were used to rigorously analyze the topic. Overall, the manuscript is well presented with detailed experiment descriptions and robust analysis, but extensive language editing is needed. The topic is also intriguing to the audiences, although it may not be the most innovative research.

I recommend minor revisions before publication. Please find details below:

Can you explain in the manuscript how a runner’s perception of landscape or scenery is related to the types of land use, elevation, slope etc.? For example, does forest mean more beautiful, while Arable land more boring? This link should be established such that the quantitative studies make sense in your research.
Please increase the resolution of Figure 2 and Figure 4. Some texts in the figure are not clear.
I suggest doing an extensive language review and revision as there are some grammatical errors. For example, throughout the manuscript, “spatial analyzes” should be changed to “spatial analysis” (e.g., Line 18), and “statistical analyzes” (e.g., Line 163) should be “statistical analysis”. Some sentences don’t make much sense, such as Lines 380 – 381. I couldn’t comprehend it.
The conclusion section needs rewriting. The “bullet points” style is too casual for an academic paper.

Author Response

Reviewer 2 –

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments.

Our responses are below

I recommend minor revisions before publication. Please find details below:

R: Can you explain in the manuscript how a runner’s perception of landscape or scenery is related to the types of land use, elevation, slope etc.? For example, does forest mean more beautiful, while Arable land more boring? This link should be established such that the quantitative studies make sense in your research.

OUR ANSWER: In our research, we did not assess the visual attractiveness of the landscape, therefore we did not assign ranks to the characteristics of relief and land use. However, we wanted to identify the features of the routes that respondents believed were the most attractive. It was the detailed quantitative analysis of these routes that allowed us to draw conclusions about what set of landscape features are the most attractive. Our research shows that it is a topographically diverse landscape with a proportional/balanced share of land use types: forests, grassland, arable land and buildings.

R: Please increase the resolution of Figure 2 and Figure 4. Some texts in the figure are not clear.

OUR ANSWER: This has been corrected.

R: I suggest doing an extensive language review and revision as there are some grammatical errors. For example, throughout the manuscript, “spatial analyzes” should be changed to “spatial analysis” (e.g., Line 18), and “statistical analyzes” (e.g., Line 163) should be “statistical analysis”. Some sentences don’t make much sense, such as Lines 380 – 381. I couldn’t comprehend it

OUR ANSWER: The text was corrected by native.

R: The conclusion section needs rewriting. The “bullet points” style is too casual for an academic paper.

OUR ANSWER: This has now been done

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1.The author mentions on line 16: “Goal was also to determine the landscape values of the competition routes, which determine their popularity.” The author mentions on line 23：“ People want to run in a visually beautiful mountain and foothill 23 landscape.”

As an ordinary contestant, he can know through common sense that the scenery of the competition route will indeed become one of the important reasons for attracting contestants to participate in the competition. Why is it necessary to study things that ordinary people can know through common sense?

Can the author reveal how much the scenery plays in determining whether contestants participate or not. Besides considering the scenery, will the contestants also consider the prize money and the difficulty of the track. Which other factor is more important compared to the scenery?

2. The author claims that: The results enable us to establish the key principles for designing new running routes …..

The author should establish a set of principles for determining running routes, rather than just providing a lot of data on how the environment affects running. As a reader, I don't want to have many questions after reading this paper, and I still need to continue to delve deeper.

3. The level of innovation in this article is too low. The reviewer did not see the author designing a novel method to analyze the survey questionnaire and GPS data.

4. The author should delve into a set of principles for determining a running route and provide examples of how to use these principles to determine a suitable running route.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Extensive editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments.

Our responses are below, the changed text is underlined.

R: The author mentions on line 16: “Goal was also to determine the landscape values of the competition routes, which determine their popularity.” The author mentions on line 23：“ People want to run in a visually beautiful mountain and foothill 23 landscape.”

OUR ANSWER: The text fragment describing the research objectives has been corrected.

R: As an ordinary contestant, he can know through common sense that the scenery of the competition route will indeed become one of the important reasons for attracting contestants to participate in the competition. Why is it necessary to study things that ordinary people can know through common sense?

OUR ANSWER: As it turns out, the view/landscape does not always matter - it depends on the race, age, sex, place of residence; people sending the survey with differing answers - in city trial it doesn't mean; literature data as well as our preliminary research (interviews with runners, own experiences from participating in such events) indicated very different motivations, which became the inspiration to undertake such research. What was obvious was not always true. We attach the questionnaire and we also completed the results, which are presented in Fig.3.

R: Can the author reveal how much the scenery plays in determining whether contestants participate or not. Besides considering the scenery, will the contestants also consider the prize money and the difficulty of the track. Which other factor is more important compared to the scenery?

OUR ANSWER: In the surveys, respondents indicated several reasons for choosing the race (see App. 1). The results are also illustrated in Figure 3 and described accordingly in the text. We also referred to them in the discussion, which was supplemented in line with the comments of other reviewers.

R: The author claims that: The results enable us to establish the key principles for designing new running routes …..

OUR ANSWER: The author should establish a set of principles for determining running routes, rather than just providing a lot of data on how the environment affects running. As a reader, I don't want to have many questions after reading this paper, and I still need to continue to delve deeper.

The conclusions have been thoroughly reworked and in this chapter you will find recommendations for designing cross-country courses. We are aware that each study clarifies only some of the doubts, but the interpretation of the results raises new questions, and this is also the case here, as we write in the conclusions. Route design is a complex process and was not the purpose of this article. The questions we wanted to answer when starting our research were: "Is the landscape an important aspect motivating runners to take part in organised runs?" and “What landscape values of the routes of running competitions determine their popularity?” Our research has made it possible to answer the issues that concern us, but we are aware that they do not exhaust the topic and further research is necessary to establish in detail the set of principles for determining running routes, taking into account not only environmental conditions, but also regional, political and social aspects.

R: The level of innovation in this article is too low. The reviewer did not see the author designing a novel method to analyze the survey questionnaire and GPS data.

OUR ANSWER: We used standard statistical tests and spatial analyses, known to and understandable to most researchers. We also used multi-dimensional techniques that go beyond testing statistical hypotheses. We have improved the description of these methods. In our opinion, it is discussible whether the use of innovative data analysis methods would add anything new.

R: The author should delve into a set of principles for determining a running route and provide examples of how to use these principles to determine a suitable running route.

OUR ANSWER: This issue was discussed in the Conclusions

R: Comments on the Quality of English Language: Extensive editing of English language required

OUR ANSWER: The text has been corrected by native.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Autors,

The paper shows notable strengths that align seamlessly with the aims and scope of the journal "Sustainability." Using an interdisciplinary approach, the study bridges geography, sports science, and environmental psychology, contributing valuable insights into the influence of landscape attractiveness on running participation. This aligns with the journal's commitment to fostering research on technical, environmental, cultural, economic, and social sustainability. The paper addresses key sustainability challenges, including the impact on ecosystems, cultural identity, and globalization.

Incorporating a case study on the Podkarpacki Ultramarathon adds a practical dimension, showcasing a willingness to share comprehensive experimental details. The research bears implications for urban planning and policy development, emphasizing its relevance to socio-economic and scientific approaches to sustainable development. The paper's strengths lie in its interdisciplinary nature, practical application, and direct relevance to the broader sustainability discourse.

Still, I have found some weaknesses to improve such as:

Methodology and Data Analysis: The paper lacks explicit details on the method used for data collection and analysis. Information on the survey design, participant demographics, and statistical methods would enhance the paper's transparency and reproducibility.

Data Presentation: The paper could benefit from more visual aids, such as graphs or tables, to present key data points more effectively. Visual representations can aid in understanding trends and patterns.

Cultural Considerations: While the paper briefly mentions cultural and social conditions affecting running activity in small towns and rural areas, a more in-depth exploration of these parts could strengthen the socio-cultural analysis.

Suggestions for Future Research: The conclusion lacks a clear discussion on avenues for future research. Recommending potential areas for further investigation could contribute to the development of the field.

I recommend to improve as well these parts:

Clarity of Hypotheses: Clearly state the hypotheses or research questions guiding the study. A concise formulation of the goals will help readers understand the study's purpose.

In-Depth Analysis of Urban Races: Further explore the reasons urban races were not considered for landscape attractiveness. A deeper analysis of the perception of landscapes in urban settings may provide valuable insights.

Explicit Integration of Gender Perspective: While women's preferences in running are briefly discussed, a more explicit integration of a gender perspective throughout the paper could enhance the analysis.

Ethical Approval: Even if ethical approval is declared as not applicable, briefly clarify why this is the case. Providing a justification adds transparency to the research process.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of English in the provided text is good.

However, some sentences are complex, and simplifying them could enhance readability

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments.

Our responses are below, the changed text is in yellow

R: Methodology and Data Analysis: The paper lacks explicit details on the method used for data collection and analysis. Information on the survey design, participant demographics, and statistical methods would enhance the paper's transparency and reproducibility.

OUR ANSWER: The data analysis methods were described in more detail, as was the survey method. Information regarding the questions is provided in the annex.

R: Data Presentation: The paper could benefit from more visual aids, such as graphs or tables, to present key data points more effectively. Visual representations can aid in understanding trends and patterns.

OUR ANSWER: The graphic side of the article has been improved and new figures, including infographics, graphical abstract, have been added.

R: Cultural Considerations: While the paper briefly mentions cultural and social conditions affecting running activity in small towns and rural areas, a more in-depth exploration of these parts could strengthen the socio-cultural analysis.

OUR ANSWER: This issue was discussed in Discussion

R: Suggestions for Future Research: The conclusion lacks a clear discussion on avenues for future research. Recommending potential areas for further investigation could contribute to the development of the field.

OUR ANSWER: This issue was discussed in the Conclusions

R: I recommend to improve as well these parts:

Clarity of Hypotheses: Clearly state the hypotheses or research questions guiding the study. A concise formulation of the goals will help readers understand the study's purpose.

OUR ANSWER: The text fragment describing the research objectives has been corrected. We include graphics presenting the combination of hypotheses, goals and research methods, which will make it easier for the reader to follow and understand the article.

R: In-Depth Analysis of Urban Races: Further explore the reasons urban races were not considered for landscape attractiveness. A deeper analysis of the perception of landscapes in urban settings may provide valuable insights.

OUR ANSWER: A detailed analysis of urban routes in terms of the attractiveness of the landscape was not carried out because the participants of these runs did not indicate the landscape as an attractor. We refer to this problem in the discussion, where we point out that the concept of landscape is associated with nature.

R: Explicit Integration of Gender Perspective: While women's preferences in running are briefly discussed, a more explicit integration of a gender perspective throughout the paper could enhance the analysis.

OUR ANSWER: This issue was discussed in Discussion

R: Ethical Approval: Even if ethical approval is declared as not applicable, briefly clarify why this is the case. Providing a justification adds transparency to the research process.

OUR ANSWER: It was specified.

R: Comments on the Quality of English Language: The quality of English in the provided text is good. However, some sentences are complex, and simplifying them could enhance readability

OUR ANSWER: The text has been corrected by native.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

After the author's revisions, this paper has met the publication requirements.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for your work and all the comments. The article has been further improved for language accuracy.

Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I want to extend my gratitude for your thorough consideration and responsiveness to the comments provided. Your efforts to address the feedback are sincerely appreciated. Thank you for taking the time to enhance the manuscript based on the suggestions provided. Your dedication to improving the quality and depth of the work is commendable. However, after reviewing your responses, I would like to make you a couple of remaining concerns:

· Methodology and Data Analysis: While mentioning that additional information has been included in the annex is noted, for clarity and transparency, it would be beneficial to integrate important methodological details directly within the main manuscript, rather than relegating them to an annex.

· Cultural Considerations and Gender Perspective: Although you've said these parts were discussed in the "Discussion" section, a more explicit and integrated analysis throughout the paper on cultural influences and gender perspectives, respectively, would significantly enhance the depth and relevance of your study.

I highly encourage addressing these points to strengthen your manuscript.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for your work and all the comments.

Our corrections have been highlighted in yellow.

Methodology and Data Analysis: While mentioning that additional information has been included in the annex is noted, for clarity and transparency, it would be beneficial to integrate important methodological details directly within the main manuscript, rather than relegating them to an annex. It's done.
Cultural Considerations and Gender Perspective: Although you've said these parts were discussed in the "Discussion" section, a more explicit and integrated analysis throughout the paper on cultural influences and gender perspectives, respectively, would significantly enhance the depth and relevance of your study.
We thoroughly examined the suggestion regarding the analysis of cultural influences and gender perspectives. However, we are unable to fully implement it due to a lack of data. Our survey questions only considered gender, age, and place of residence, without incorporating cultural factors.

Rewriting the entire article in the context of a more explicit integration of the gender perspective would also necessitate a deeper exploration of aspects related to age and place of residence. The current version of the manuscript is well-balanced and primarily focuses on the runners' perception of the landscape, which was our main objective.