The Structure of Beauty: Informal Green Spaces in Their Users’ Eyes

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I would appreciate if some of the theoretical discussions concerning aesthetics in landscape architecture could be brought to the front of the paper, with some consideration of how "wastelands" fit (or don't fit) into conventional aesthetic frames.  An interesting finding of the research is that people seem to be applying the same basic aesthetic frames to IGS as they do to other types of "natural" landscapes, such as parks and gardens.   

While I could mostly understand the intended meaning of the sentences, there are a number of issues with word choice and sentence clarity that would be aided by more close English language proofreading.

Author Response

Thank you for your positive review. Please find below our responses to the comments provided.

Comment: “I would appreciate if some of the theoretical discussions concerning aesthetics in landscape architecture could be brought to the front of the paper, with some consideration of how "wastelands" fit (or don't fit) into conventional aesthetic frames.  An interesting finding of the research is that people seem to be applying the same basic aesthetic frames to IGS as they do to other types of "natural" landscapes, such as parks and gardens.”

Answer: A respective paragraph describing additional theoretical discussion concerning aesthetics in landscape architecture was provided in the section of the Introduction (Lines 44-54)

“The question we are exploring is the extent to which IGS contribute to the overall aesthetics of urban green areas. Considering the environmental specificity, which, following Ingo Kowarik, can be referred to as the "fourth nature" [1-2], the inquiry arises as to whether IGS transforms the human aesthetic experience significantly. Presently, urban green spaces are primarily designed based on coherence and legibility. It would appear, therefore, that an undesignated landscape, a fourth nature landscape, could enhance the aesthetic experience by providing comprehensiveness and mystery.”

Comments on the Quality of English Language: “While I could mostly understand the intended meaning of the sentences, there are a number of issues with word choice and sentence clarity that would be aided by more close English language proofreading.”

The entire text was translated by a professional translator and later checked by a native speaker. We asked this person to read the paper again. This resulted in minor changes in several places (lines: 37, 38, 55-56, 71, 95, 110-112, 135-136, 153-154, 166, 204, 214-216, 290, 431-433, 439, 456, 487, 519-520).

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

the article submitted for review is an interesting and good scientific work. The entire analysis was carried out correctly. You only need to complete the information about the VEP group.

1. why the 55+ group was omitted

2. why students and professionals were combined into one group

3. what was the numerical composition of the subgroups.

Author Response

Comment: Dear authors,
the article submitted for review is an interesting and good scientific work. The entire analysis was carried out correctly. You only need to complete the information about the VEP group:

Answer: Thank You for so good opinion. We really appreciate your opinion, and we believe our work is important for the future of public greenery in European cities.

Comment: “1. why the 55+ group was omitted - Representatives of the 55+ age group were not recruited?”

Answer: Representatives of the 55+ age group were not recruited for the study due to the difficult field conditions associated with the lack of IGS development. Users of 55+ age were very rare as users of our wasteland areas selected for the study.

Comment: “2. why students and professionals were combined into one group?”

Answer: We have divided the respondents into two main categories:

(a) those seeking their professional identity and stabilising themselves in the labour market

1. b) people with a stable position in terms of family and professional life.

Accordingly, people up to the age of 34, whether independently studying, working or combining these two roles, ended up in one group. 

Comment: “3. what was the numerical composition of the subgroups?”

Answer: (a) those seeking their professional identity and stabilising themselves in the labour market, aged between 19 and 34, 13 persons.
(b) those with a stabilised position in terms of family and work. Ages between 35 and 55. - 12 persons.

We provided respective changes in the manuscript (lines 192-201) to make the issue more clear.

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript seems appropriate to test the hypothesis. The conclusions are supported by the data provided. All references seem quite relevant and not many self-references are included.

Line 201. There is a yellow note left.

Line 254-264. I cannot say for sure that I fully understood what you are trying to say along these lines. Perhaps a different way of writing would make it clearer.

Author Response

Reviewer 3.

Comment: “The manuscript seems appropriate to test the hypothesis. The conclusions are supported by the data provided. All references seem quite relevant and not many self-references are included.”

Answer: Thank you for your very positive review. Please find below our responses to the comments provided.

Comment: “Line 201. There is a yellow note left.”

Answer: Thank you for noticing the error; already corrected, of course.

Comment: “Line 254-264. I cannot say for sure that I fully understood what you are trying to say along these lines. Perhaps a different way of writing would make it clearer.”

Answer: We have written this paragraph in different words, and we hope it is now legible. It is now (lines 284-299):

“In order to verify the adopted division of pictures into “landscape”, “scenery”, and  “special elements” categories, we conducted a chi-square test. We tested the "null" hypothesis, which assumes that the elements captured in the photographs are not related to the picture category. The outcome was empirical values of test statistics and their likelihood. X-squared = 136.32, df = 20, p-value ≈ 0.000. The results indicate the zero hypothesis must be rejected in favour of an alternative hypothesis. This suggests that the characteristics being studied are interdependent, meaning the presence of distinguished elements depends on the picture category. In the next step, we checked whether the distribution of photographed elements in particular categories was satisfactory. The “zero” hypothesis was rejected in each category, demonstrating a significant variation in the distribution of analysed elements among the different categories.

Reviewer 4 Report

I think this is a very interesting article. My suggestions are as follows:

1. I suggest that the authors propose a definition of IGS in their article. The introduction to Warsaw presents some typical IGS with photographs.

2. Did the employed respondents understand the definition and structure of IGS, and did the authors provide them with the basic knowledge?

3. In the conclusion, authors should answer the three questions on lines 99-101. Also, the conclusion should be included in the summary.

4. The discussion section is very interesting. I think some of it should be in the results section. In the discussion section, I suggest focusing on the comparison with other research results, the policy implications of this paper, and the shortcomings of this paper.

5. Did the authors consider the accessibility of IGS?

Author Response

Reviewer 4.

Comment: “I think this is a very interesting article. My suggestions are as follows:”

Answer: Thank you very much for such a positive yet insightful review. It has helped us to improve our text to make it better and more interesting.

Comment: “1. I suggest that the authors propose a definition of IGS in their article. The introduction to Warsaw presents some typical IGS with photographs.”

Answer: The section Introduction (lines: 44-47) formulates a new brief definition of IGS. “Informal Green Spaces are urban green areas that are not intentionally shaped and maintained by public administration but are utilized by residents as open recreational areas.” The literature review we have prepared also sheds light on how modern science defines IGS. We would like to thank you for your suggestion related to the photos of the Warsaw IGS, which helped us a lot in formulating our short definition.

Comment: “2. Did the employed respondents understand the definition and structure of IGS, and did the authors provide them with the basic knowledge?”

Answer: Yes, employed respondents were informed about the study's subject, including the basic description of what IGS is. We also provided respective sentences in the manuscript (lines 189-191)

Comment: “3. In the conclusion, the authors should answer the three questions on lines 99-101. The conclusion should also be included in the summary.”

Answer: We sought to answer the research questions posed earlier in the conclusion. We have reworded the text to make this clearer (lines 547-560). We also provided respective sentences in the abstract (lines 26-28).

Comment: “4. The discussion section is very interesting. I think some of it should be in the results section. In the discussion section, I suggest focusing on the comparison with other research results, the policy implications of this paper, and the shortcomings of this paper.”

Answer: You are probably referring to the first four paragraphs. We cite some of the results there to discuss them with the views of other authors whose work we give references to, so we decided to leave these first three paragraphs in the 'Discussion' section.

We have moved the sentence from Conclusions to the Discussion (lines 541-545).

Comment: “5. Did the authors consider the accessibility of IGS?”

Answer: Yes, all the Informal Green Spaces (IGS) we have studied are open and accessible to the public. We have explained it in subsection 2.2. Study Areas Selection (lines 148-150).