The Senses as Experiences in Wine Tourism—A Comparative Statistical Analysis between Abruzzo and Douro

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

N.A.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

I sincerely thank you for the review of my scientific article.

Thank you for your collaboration.

Best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

We suggest that the title should be more coherent with the direct reference on the regions studied (Abruzzo and Douro) otherwise than creating the expectation on a national levvel (Italy and Portugal).

In Literature Review it would be important to consider a wider perspective on wine tourism as a scientific subject. There are lots of classical and very good authors such as Getz, Hall et al and Charters and Ali-Knight, among others. The same occurs in experience considering the classical work of Pine and Gilmore and not only some recent case studies in other regions. 

We also think that it would be wiser to consider a cross reference of other theoretical and practicalk studies in the conclusions because it seemed to us they could be clearly improved. 

Minor revision requested

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I am writing with immense gratitude and satisfaction to express my sincere thanks for the careful and thorough review of my scientific article titled "The senses as experiences in wine tourism – A comparative statistical analysis between Abruzzo and Douro."

As requested, we have changed the title of the paper to make it more coherent, directly referring to the studied regions (Abruzzo and Douro). We have also incorporated the suggested introduction of classic authors in this field of knowledge. Your dedication and competence were crucial in enhancing the quality and rigor of the work, and I am extremely grateful for the valuable contribution you offered to the paper. All changes have been incorporated in the text marked in blue.

Once again, thank you for dedicating your time and expertise to this work. Your assistance has been invaluable, and I am truly grateful for your collaboration.

Sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

In terms of the structure of the article it is well achieved, as well as in terms of content, having achieved the objectives initially set.

The construction of schemas makes the perception and understanding of the study confusing. Even if scientific articles are not aimed at the public, I believe that we should try to make the information accessible, if not to all, at least to as many people as possible. However, all the conclusions and limitations are explained very clearly which allows potential stakeholders to understand the results of the study.

To the extent that it is intended that this type of information can be useful in the management of companies in the two regions under study and others, account must be taken of the accessibility of the communication and information that is intended to be transmitted, which has been achieved.

This is a very interesting study. Congratulations to the authors.

Minor editing of the English language required.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

I sincerely thank you for the careful and professional review of my scientific article. Your expertise and punctuality were crucial for the success of the project. Thank you for your collaboration.

Best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx