Tailoring In-Flight Food Consumption to Alleviate Fear of Flying Through Sensory Stimulation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. I recommend the title be revised to fuse in food. This is because, although the paper discusses the fear of flying about chemical senses, much emphasis was centered on the impact of olfactory senses on food intake on board. Hence, the title should be revised to titillate readers.
2.  Why are authors choosing "fear of flying".  lines 14-15 only pointed out the terrorism and other factors that affect people's flying mood, but the subsequent (lines 17-18) statements also mentioned the five human senses' responses to surroundings. The paper went further discussion food intake unboard relationship with sensory impact. I recommend that the word "fear of flying" be substituted with a more appropriate word, and the entire consideration should be centered on food intake on board. 
3. Line 36: Define the abbreviated words.
4. Are the food, nutrition, and health status of passengers factored into the meals served on board? I suggest that authors include some thoughts on this in a few lines to complement the paper.
5. Also, it seems there are preferences when it comes to food served on board among the various classes of passengers (1st, economy, business class). What are the authors' thoughts on getting a balance of food intake onboard for fear-free flying per the mitigating strategy of this topic discussed?
6. Considering the 5 senses utilized a the key indices of discussion, it seems taste, hearing from the flight engine noise, and smell were the specific 3 that were tackled in relation to food consumed on board. What about vision, which has to deal with the lightning simulations in the cabin based on the flying period, coupled with stewards serving meals? This cabin's light influences the food color to an extent. Also, the temperature and pressure in the cabin relationship to the passenger's body/skin affect the mood and meal consumption. I recommend that these key points be developed and incorporated to boost the scientific quality of the paper.
7. Also, the period or time of flight and changes in the departure and arrival places interval of the meal consumed on board influence digestion, which impacts the passengers' flying experiences and well-being.

Author Response

1. I recommend the title be revised to fuse in food. This is because, although the paper discusses the fear of flying about chemical senses, much emphasis was centered on the impact of olfactory senses on food intake on board. Hence, the title should be revised to titillate readers.

We thank the reviewer for their very important suggestion. The title was changed accordingly.

 

2. Why are authors choosing "fear of flying".  lines 14-15 only pointed out the terrorism and other factors that affect people's flying mood, but the subsequent (lines 17-18) statements also mentioned the five human senses' responses to surroundings. The paper went further discussion food intake unboard relationship with sensory impact. I recommend that the word "fear of flying" be substituted with a more appropriate word, and the entire consideration should be centered on food intake on board. 

The reviewer is right. The introduction has been substantially revised, and the role of food consumption in emotional arousal has been further elaborated to better clarify the rationale of the entire manuscript.

 

3. Line 36: Define the abbreviated words.

Thank You. Done. Reference is also present for the readers’ convenience.

 

4. Are the food, nutrition, and health status of passengers factored into the meals served on board? I suggest that authors include some thoughts on this in a few lines to complement the paper.

Thank you for the suggestion. Changes done.

 

5. Also, it seems there are preferences when it comes to food served on board among the various classes of passengers (1st, economy, business class). What are the authors' thoughts on getting a balance of food intake onboard for fear-free flying per the mitigating strategy of this topic discussed?

The reviewer is right. However, the strategy proposed in this paper should apply equally across all passenger classes. A sentence was added to address this issue.

 

6. Considering the 5 senses utilized a the key indices of discussion, it seems taste, hearing from the flight engine noise, and smell were the specific 3 that were tackled in relation to food consumed on board. What about vision, which has to deal with the lightning simulations in the cabin based on the flying period, coupled with stewards serving meals? This cabin's light influences the food color to an extent. Also, the temperature and pressure in the cabin relationship to the passenger's body/skin affect the mood and meal consumption. I recommend that these key points be developed and incorporated to boost the scientific quality of the paper.

Thank to reviewer for this suggestion. The text was improved throughout the manuscript to improve the clarity of the paper, overall.

 

7. Also, the period or time of flight and changes in the departure and arrival places interval of the meal consumed on board influence digestion, which impacts the passengers' flying experiences and well-being.

Thank You for pointing that out. Of course, your consideration has a fair physiological rationale. However, this paper goes beyond this argument taking into account mainly the sensory properties of food independently from merely nutritional and digestive mechanisms that should instead deserve a separate paper to be properly faced.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments attached with the file. Please check

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

This manuscript presents a well-structured and innovative perspective on using chemosensory stimulation to alleviate the Fear of Flying (FF).

1. The paper introduces a unique approach to managing FF through food and sensory science, which is underexplored in the literature. The focus on in-flight meals as a therapeutic tool is creative and aligns with growing interest in passenger well-being.

Thank You for Your kind words.

2. The authors provide a thorough background on FF, chemosensory perception, and airline meal challenges, grounding their proposal in existing research.

Thanks, much appreciated.

3. The suggestions (e.g., personalized meal selection via apps, multisensory enhancements, wearable monitoring) are feasible and could be readily tested or implemented by airlines.

Thank You.

4. The integration of psychology, sensory science, nutrition, and technology strengthens the manuscript’s impact.

Thanks, much appreciated.

5. While the perspective is compelling, the paper would benefit from preliminary data (e.g., surveys on passenger preferences, small-scale sensory tests, or case studies) to support the proposed strategies.

Thank You. We have added some more discussion and significant related literature in Section 3.1.

6. The neurobiological link between chemosensory stimuli and anxiety reduction could be expanded (e.g., how specific flavors/aromas modulate stress pathways).

Thank You. We totally agree with your suggestion. We have added some more consideration and related literature in Section 1.

7. The authors should address challenges, such as individual variability in taste/smell perception, dietary restrictions, or airline logistical constraints (e.g., cost, meal customization feasibility).

Thank You. We briefly added the point in Section 3.2.

8. If airlines were to recommend certain foods/beverages for anxiety, are there risks (e.g., overconsumption of alcohol/sugar, liability)? A brief discussion would strengthen the paper.

Thank You. After having pointed that out in the Introduction, we have briefly speculated around this point in the Conclusions section.

9. Figure 1 is a useful summary, but additional visuals (e.g., a flowchart of proposed interventions, a table comparing airline meal strategies) could enhance clarity.

Thank You. As suggested, we added a second related figure to graphically explain a proposed intervention related to the use case scenario.

 

This manuscript is valid and merits publication after minor revisions. The topic is timely, the writing is clear, and the proposals are innovative. However, addressing the gaps above (particularly adding more concrete evidence or pilot-study results) would significantly strengthen its contribution.

Thank You for Your kind words and Your dedication. We tried revising the manuscript under Your valuable guidance and we strongly hope our article can be deemed acceptable for the Journal.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I must appreciate the authors for embracing the constructive critiques to revise and improve the paper. Comments raised were carefully addressed, and I must commend their effort. 

Without further reservations, I highly recommend the paper for acceptance and publication.