Consumer Attitudes towards Food Preservation Methods
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I would recommend to add more sources from WoS and Scopus Databases, add the limits and barriers of the research, provide deeper discussion and once more check the formal side of the paper.
Source of each Table and Figure needs to be added.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The purpose of the article was to assess the perception of 7 different methods of food processing and to identify influencing factors such as education as well as living space and at the same time to consider whether consumers check this type of information on labels.
The authors approach the theoretical part in a complete way and present a clear image on the approached subject.
The only significant observation on the text would be related to the size of the sample, namely I would recommend the inclusion of arguments for which the number of 438 respondents was considered representative (relative to what / what is the titular population / statistical population, probability of guaranteeing results, etc.) .
Regarding the appearance of the article and the arrangement on the page, I would suggest the correction from the bibliography (which is numbered twice). In addition, from line 207 to the end, the font is different from the rest of the text (I suggest reformatting).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Article :
Title: Consumer Attitudes Towards Food Preservation Methods
Journal: Foods.
Comments to authors:
In general, a sentence shouldn’t be more than three lines and paragraph must be justified
Line number 38 rephrase from start
Line number 40 split the sentence
Line number 44. Please add some more references about innovative nonthermal technologies. Please check these references. 1. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 45(1), e15018. 2. Food Science and Nutrition, 9(6), 3048-3058. These papers can also be used in the coming paragraphs.
Line number 55 remove full stop
Line number 73 add reference (Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 17(2), 437-457)
Line number 83 add reference (International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 54(8), 2563-2569 & Foods, 9(2), 214.)
Line number 91. add reference
Line number 94-97 split the sentence
Line number 101 incomplete sentence
Line number 102 pressured is gradually increased
Line number 113. add reference
In table, Why treatment is italic, please also start the sentence (should be capital)
Line number 219 add more details in last. It is incomplete sentence
Line number 223 citation way is different from remaining article
Line number 242 replace word level with another word. As statement is confusing
Line number 267 rephrase line (found/observed/noticed)
Line number 344 replace “with” some other word as it used two times in a sentence
Line number 365 add reference
Overall comments
Scientific names should be check again.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx