Residents’ Perceptions and Behaviors Regarding the Policy of Integrating Intangible Cultural Heritages into the Tourism Industry: Evidence from Dali, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe study deals with an up-to-date topic as intangible cultural heritages are special attractions in tourism development.
The structure of the study is logical, and the aim of the research is clear. The paper focuses on investigating influencing relationships between residents' perceptions of tourism impacts, their behavior and place attachment in cultural heritage tourism.
The research was founded by an appropriate theoretical background, the literature review summarizes the basic studies. I recommend the authors expanding this chapter with a systematic literature review analysis. I also recommend that the authors review previous publications on tourism in Dali and its surroundings:
Li, Tianyi ; Zoltán, Bujdosó
ECONOMIC VULNERABILITY OF SPECIALIZED TOURISM CITY: A CASE STUDY IN SOUTHWEST OF CHINA
GEOJOURNAL OF TOURISM AND GEOSITES 47 : 2 pp. 600-630. , 31 p. (2023)
Li, Tianyi ; Bujdosó, Zoltán
SUSTAINABLE TOURISM IN DALI (PROGRESS, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES)
ACTA CAROLUS ROBERTUS 10 : 1 pp. 141-148. , 8 p.m. (2020)
The methodology and process of the research were clearly presented. To achieve the goals authors have used relevant methods. The quality of Fig.3 should be improved.
recommend to give up-to-date data to Figure 1.
The results of the research are relevant and carry new scientific value. The findings from this study demonstrate how to widen the scope for measuring residents' perceived impacts of
tourism
The findings contribute to intangible cultural heritage tourism research and have practical implications for local authorities to reduce the negative impacts of tourism
on residents.
I also recommend making globally usable recommendations and new directions for further research in the conclusions.
Author Response
Comments 1: [I recommend the authors expanding this chapter with a systematic literature review analysis. I also recommend that the authors review previous publications on tourism in Dali and its surroundings]
Response 1:Thank you for your suggestions. In this paper, literature review is written in order according to the research hypothesis. And relevant review conclusion and research gap is written in the part of introduction.
Besides, the suggestion that review previous publications on tourism in Dali did draw our attentions. From the overall point of view of the paper, the research object is intangible cultural heritage tourism. Dali is one of the typical cases of intangible cultural heritage tourism in China. Besides, in the study site, we have emphasized the reason why we chose Dali as a case.(We have carefully read the two documents provided by the evaluation experts and found them to be of great value. In the future, it will be cited in the research related to Dali.)
Comments 2: [The quality of Fig.3 should be improved.]
Response 2: Thank you for your suggestions. The Fig.3 is automatically generated by calculation. And we have improved the resolution of the picture.
Comments 3: [Recommend to give up-to-date data to Figure 1]
Response 3: Thank you. But actually, I didn 't understand what your question mean. The Figure 1 in this paper is the research model which didn’t have data.
Comments 4: [I also recommend making globally usable recommendations and new directions for further research in the conclusions.]
Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. We have revised the implications to emphasize this point.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsFirst of all, I would like to thank the authors for their contribution to the field of tourism research. This paper explores the relationship between residents' perceptions and behaviors toward local intangible cultural heritage (ICH) tourism, focusing on intergroup contact and place attachment. It uses data collected from Dali Bai Autonomous Prefecture and has profound implications for reducing the negative impacts of tourism on residents. This study is relevant, but several aspects need to be improved to enhance its academic rigor and
1. For the Abstract: The authors need to briefly supplement the introduction of the methods and research gaps.
2. For the Literature Review: The authors should increase the citation of some recent studies, such as including more recent studies on the integration of ICH and tourism.
3. For the Research Methods: The authors should further provide more details on the measurement tools and data analysis methods.
4. For the Data Analysis: The authors need to clarify how the key constructs (e.g., positive perceptions, place attachment, intergroup contact) were measured and validated.
5. For the Discussion: The authors should increase the chapter of the Discussion section. The manuscript lacks an in-depth discussion of its application in the context of ICH tourism and a discussion of the results.
6. Regarding the results: The authors should further provide adequate explanations for the findings on how intergroup contact strengthens positive perceptions but weakens place attachment.
Author Response
Comments 1: The authors need to briefly supplement the introduction of the methods and research gaps.
Response 1:Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. And we adjusted part of the abstract.
Comments 2: The authors should increase the citation of some recent studies, such as including more recent studies on the integration of ICH and tourism.
Response 2: Thank you for your suggestions. We have added some studies about the integration of ICH and tourism, which aims to strength the importance of the balance of ‘ICH and tourism’
Comments 3: The authors should further provide more details on the measurement tools and data analysis methods.
Response 3: Thank you for your suggestions about the research method. We have further explained the specific application of smart PLS.
Added content: Partial least squares structural equation modeling(PLS-SEM) are used to examined the collected questionnaire data with Smart PLS version 4.0 software. PLS-SEM is widely used in the field of tourism research. The result for choose PLS-SEM as data analysis method is that unlike covariance-based SEM ,PLS-SEM requires less information about measurement scales, and sample sizes. And PLS-SEM is suitable to investigate the complex research model that are proposed as an estimation framework incorporating related theories and empirical data. Following Kineber’s research, the study was conducted in four steps.
Comments 4: The authors need to clarify how the key constructs (e.g., positive perceptions, place attachment, intergroup contact) were measured and validated.
Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. It may be that we do not write the description of the key construct very specifically, so that you think the strategy and correction content of the key construct are insufficient. So, we try to change the description of the key construct(3.2 questionnaire design).
Comments 5: The authors should increase the chapter of the Discussion section. The manuscript lacks an in-depth discussion of its application in the context of ICH tourism and a discussion of the results.
Response 5: Thank you for your suggestions. We have added some contents about the ICH tourism and highlighted the characteristics of intangible cultural heritage.
Comments 6: The authors should further provide adequate explanations for the findings on how intergroup contact strengthens positive perceptions but weakens place attachment.
Response 6: Thank you for your suggestions. This conclusion is derived from the moderating effect.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you very much for your careful and rigorous revision. This study has some innovations and practical contributions in the context of tourism development. I have some minor comments.
1. What is the detailed distribution of the sample? How did the author calculate the sample size of 510 (Section 3.3)?
2. The author conducted a survey in 2022, but the description of Dali was in 2019 (Section 3.1). The author should add some new data and information about the study site, especially the data in 2022.
Author Response
Comments 1:What is the detailed distribution of the sample? How did the author calculate the sample size of 510 (Section 3.3)?
Response1: The detailed distribution of the sample is shown in Table 1.The number of samples is the number of questionnaires collected. The expression has been re-modified
Comments 2:The author conducted a survey in 2022, but the description of Dali was in 2019 (Section 3.1). The author should add some new data and information about the study site, especially the data in 2022.
Response1:Thank you for pointing this out. We have updated the data for Dali Prefecture for 2022.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
