Mining and Visualization of Tourism Cultural Image Based on the Information Transmission Model of Tourism Cultural Map—Taking Nanjing Xuanwu Lake Tourist Attraction as an Example
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI consider the topic of the paper to be topical, with the potential to stimulate a broader academic discussion on possible solutions in the field of cultural heritage management. The paper has a logical structure and the authors use correct methods. The content is balanced, relies on relevant sources and provides an interesting insight that can be useful in practice as well as for further academic discussion.
In general, in my opinion, this is a high quality study, very beneficial to practice at the both theoretical and empirical level.
I agree with the authors' that destination image is a „ … comprehensive mental concept composed of all objective knowledge, impressions, and concepts travelers hold about the destination”, but this is not true in general. That is, as the authors rightly say, image is a mental construct but purely subjective, which means that the key to its final form (often highly volatile) are feelings and individually set filters of perception, which distort the objectively existing information (knowledge) considerably. Authors should distinguish between the image - identity and reputation of a destination. These are three distinct and overlapping concepts. For more details on the differences and specificities, see the study: Matlovičová, K. 2024. The Triadic Nexus: Understanding the Interplay and Semantic Boundaries Between Place Identity, Place Image, and Place Reputation. Folia Geographica 66(1), 69-102. Understanding the differences between destination image and destination identity is crucial in this case.
In the context of discussing tourism cultural image and cultural maps, it is essential to clearly define the concept of cultural heritage. Matlovicova, K., Husarova, M. 2017. in their study - Potential of the Heritage Marketing in Tourist Destinations Development. Cicva Castle Ruins Case Study. Folia Geographica 59/1 - argue that natural and cultural heritage should be understood as a process in which objects, events, places, practices, and personalities from the past are reinterpreted and transformed into experiences for the present. This transformation is often driven by current political, social, or economic needs. Heritage, thus conceived, must be recognized not only as a means of understanding the past but also as a vital tool for interpreting and shaping the present. The connection between the past and present, through the preservation of tangible and intangible relics, lies at the core of heritage marketing. This process not only allows the past to remain relevant in the present but also significantly influences the contemporary world.
The process of preserving, protecting, and commemorating the past can be realized in a multitude of ways. The authors of the study identify three key paradigmatic shifts in the approach to the past, which have influenced the creation of environments designed to serve contemporary needs, although originally conceived in the past. These paradigms are outlined chronologically as follows: (a) preservation, (b) conservation, and (c) heritage. According to the authors, these stages are not strictly defined but rather represent overlapping layers of thought, each building upon and incorporating aspects of the previous stages. In essence, each stage expands the prior paradigm, creating a complex, interwoven system of approaches.
The evolution of heritage thought can be described in three main stages:
The Preservation Paradigm: In this stage, preservation and development are viewed as opposing forces. Preservation is understood as the protection of relics from change, often perceived as an effort to minimize the impacts of development. Development, in this context, is seen as an adversary to the preservation of the past for future generations. Ashworth (2012) provides the example of many Gothic cathedrals in Europe, which were built atop the ruins of earlier cathedrals, illustrating a rigid approach to preservation that resists any compromise in terms of reusing historical sites for alternative purposes.
The Conservation Paradigm: This approach broadens the scope of protection beyond individual buildings to include the surrounding environment. It emphasizes meaningful preservation efforts that allow for the adaptive reuse of relics, objects, or environments as part of their ongoing protection. This paradigm acknowledges that preservation can coexist with change, and relics from the past can be repurposed for future needs without compromising their historical value.
The Cultural and Natural Heritage Paradigm: This stage represents a further shift in the understanding of heritage protection. Natural and cultural heritage are viewed as conduits of historical narratives that can address contemporary social, political, and economic needs. Here, the focus is less on the preservation of relics for their intrinsic value and more on their utility in serving present-day purposes. As Lowenthal (1985) notes, heritage is often more about creating meaning from the past rather than simply preserving relics. In this context, the process of selecting and preserving elements of the past becomes crucial, and Ashworth emphasizes the importance of addressing three key questions: Who makes the selection? On what criteria is it based? And what responsibilities do those involved bear in this process?
These questions highlight the need for a critical examination of heritage conservation practices, ensuring that the selection of what is preserved serves both historical integrity and contemporary relevance.
Nevertheless, these remarks do not detract from the overall quality of the study. In conclusion, I would say that the study has the potential to engage a broad audience of professionals once the suggested revisions are addressed. I recommend the study for publication following revision.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for the opportunity to rate this interesting article. When developing new products or services, it is essential to include the user and his opinions in the production process. The proposed iterative process of updating the map based on user interactions and feedback improves the usual map designs, promoting cultural learning.
In the article's introduction, the authors present the purpose and reasons for the research. Relevant and contemporary sources are included in the literature review.
The method of content analysis is suitable for this type of research. It was conducted using secondary data that is publicly available. The analysis was carried out thoroughly and provided results, which the authors interpret and discuss in detail.
In its entirety, the article is written in a readable and interesting way, even for a wider readership. The discussion summarizes the main findings, together with the limitations.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsTitle: The title does not reflect the article's content according to a case study. The site must be included in the title as a study applied in Xuanwu Lake in Nanjing, China.
Abstract: The abstract concisely presents the main points of the article - objective, methodology, results, and conclusions -although the understanding of what they intend is unclear.
Keywords: They can be improved because other essential words are not listed.
Introduction: The introduction contextualizes the theme and defines the work's problem and objectives. The bibliography used in what is intended to be a literature review could be improved.
The article's structure is organized logically, and the development of the text is coherent, although difficult to understand.
Methodology - The methodology is described in detail.
The results are presented with tables, graphs, figures, and schemes consistent with the objectives and methodology. However, researchers are only intelligible about the topics under analysis or other related areas.
The communication of research results, primarily when funded as is the case, must be accessible to as many people as possible - which is not the case. They say we propose an improved information transmission model for tourism cultural maps, aiming to clarify the route to convey tourism culture information between the cartographer and map users. I hope applying the knowledge acquired will benefit tourists' understanding of the visualization of tourist cultural images.
The discussion and the conclusion could be just one point because each complements the other, and the conclusion is of little use. They summarize the article's main findings and offer reflections on the implications of the results and suggestions for future research, which is essential. The study's limitations could be a little more detailed, and comparative studies should be presented. It must be improved.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI accept paper in present form.
