Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I read the reviewed article with great interest. The detail and comprehensiveness of the analysis made a good impression on me. The authors made a great effort to identify the content of scientific articles in their chosen research area. I appreciate the use of systematic literature review and thematic analysis as a research method. This article aimed to investigate the impact of hotels and related factors on the health of hotel consumers. I acknowledge that the authors managed to achieve this goal.

The obtained results have utilitarian value (as indicated by the authors themselves in their article) for many entities, including scientists and entrepreneurs from the hotel industry. However, the authors are aware of the limitations of their analyses.

In assessing its scientific merit, I believe that the article contributes to the literature by offering an interdisciplinary perspective on the impact of hotels on consumer health. The systematic review and thematic analysis provide valuable insights, although future research should seek to overcome the limitations identified by the authors. I don't find any strong criticisms of the article. The current version is acceptable to me.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language appears to be correct and in line with academic standards. The language used is formal, and the sentence structure and terminology are appropriate to the research context. However, English is not my native language, so my assessment cannot be final.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Firstly, thank you very much for recognising my research topic and findings. It is very important to me. This will be my first English language journal. Your encouragement and recognition give me confidence that I can continue to put more passion and effort into my future academic research. Secondly, I have corrected the grammar again, and as you suggested, there are some basic grammatical problems, and I will be more careful and rigorous in my next manuscript.

Once again, I would like to express my gratitude for the time and effort you have put in and the recognition you have given me. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study aims to refine and summarise the fragmented factors from previous studies that affect hotel consumers' health experience. It is an interesting piece of work, and the work is well organised and well written. However, the theoreitcal and practical implications of the work are a bit weak at the moment. I would suggest the authors to further enhance the implications of the research to justify the publication. 

 

Previous studies have not paid much attention to the health experience of hotel consumers; therefore, this paper aims to fill in the specific gap. The methodology part is presented in details. However, why the three clusters are named “impact from consumers” “impact from hotels” “impact from special event”? The authors need to provide more explanation. In addition, Line “109” mentions social cognitive theory will be used to guide the study. However, the theory is not described in details. The authors are suggested to provide more details. The conclusions are consistent with the evidence and argument presented. However, I would suggest the authors to further enhance the theoretical and practical implications of the research.  Additionally, with regards to the tables and figures, figure 4 should be moved up directly following the paragraph when it is first mentioned. The authors need to double check if all tables and figures are placed in the right place. 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review comments:

This paper classifies three factors that affect the health of hotel customers: hotels, consumers themselves, and special events, and further combs the academic research on the impact of hotel customer health from 2019 to 2023. However, this paper also has some shortcomings:

1. The special event mentioned in this article only mentions the COVID-19, which is onefold to a certain extent. Although the final conclusion points out that COVID-19 is one of the special events, it does not explain how other types of special events in existing studies affect the health of hotel customers.

2. Although the future direction part of this paper puts forward 9 problems that can be studied in the future, it is still not specific enough and is more general. It is best to further explain and refine it according to the lack of existing research and the necessity of research.

3. At present, the rapid development of artificial intelligence has penetrated into the field of hotels, and more and more hotels have integrated intelligent devices, such as Tmall elves and food delivery robots. The academic community is also rich in research on this, but in this article, there is no relevant research on how the development of artificial intelligence in the hotel industry affects the health of hotel customers, which the author can consider.

4. There are some errors in the table of this article. It is recommended that the author carefully revise the content of the article. For example, the “consumers” in Figure 7 are missing the letter “C”.

5. Given the high correlation between hotel employees and consumer health in the hotel industry, it is recommended that the author supplement the impact of hotel employees on consumer health in section 5.2.1.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Some sentences require minor editing.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf