Air Pollution and Urban Environment: Residents Approach in the Wider Area of Volos City, Greece
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
the article submitted for review is correct, but it requires some additions, especially in the section on research methodology.
In quantitative research, the selection of the sample (its representativeness) is important. Therefore, it is necessary to characterize the demographic data of the residents of Volos and confirm that your sample is representative.
In Table 1 and in the text, if we start with "according to", the names of the authors should be provided.
It should be presented how the survey data was collected.
Is there no data from the 2021 census? Maybe there are other, more modern data available on residents?
It should be explained why the study involved residents of villages and small towns, since the study was conducted among residents of Volos and within a 10 km border?
Other minor comments:
The summary should provide numerical data of the presented results.
In the body of the article - titles of figures placed at the bottom of the figure
In the discussion, please analyze: whether the research period, short, one-time data set could have had an impact on the research results.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper is about air pollution and its impact on urban environments, specifically focusing on the perceptions of residents in the wider area of Volos city, Greece, based on demographic factors such as age and dwelling place. It explores an intriguing topic. However, the following revisions and improvements are necessary:
Line 9-27 (Abstract): The abstract provides a comprehensive overview of the study, but it could benefit from a clearer articulation of how the findings contribute to existing literature. Could you clarify the novelty of this research compared to prior studies?
Line 31-36 (Introduction): The introduction highlights the impact of industrial and technological advancements on environmental degradation. Could you elaborate on the specific challenges faced by cities of similar size and industrialization to Volos?
Line 47-53 (Introduction): The study aims to reveal the importance of demographic influences on perceptions of air quality. How were these influences operationalized in the study? Could the methodology for selecting these demographics be explained further?
Line 99-111 (Methodology): The use of one-way ANOVA to analyze differences in perceptions is appropriate, but were any post hoc tests conducted to validate the statistical significance of observed differences?
Line 112-117 (Survey Design): The questionnaire uses a seven-point Likert scale. Was the scale validated in any previous studies, or did the authors conduct their own validation?
Line 124-133 (City of Volos): Volos is described as heavily industrialized. Were pollution measurements (e.g., particulate matter or NO2 levels) incorporated into the analysis, or is this study purely perception-based?
Line 138-147 (Results – Sociodemographics): The majority of participants are aged 18-30 (60.8%) and urban residents (85.1%). Does this skew in demographics affect the generalizability of the findings?
Line 155-167 (Results – Age Clusters): The study finds significant differences in perceptions between certain age groups. Could the authors discuss how these differences might inform targeted environmental campaigns?
Line 188-198 (Results – Dwelling Place): The results highlight differences in perceptions based on dwelling place. How do these findings align or conflict with prior studies on urban-rural environmental perceptions?
Line 214-275 (Discussion): The discussion mentions tailored awareness campaigns and urban green spaces as solutions. Were these recommendations derived from participant responses, or are they based solely on the authors’ interpretations?
Line 284-290 (Limitations): The authors acknowledge demographic limitations in the sample. Could future studies address these by including a more balanced representation of rural and older participants?
General Comment on Figures and Tables: Figures 2–6 visualize the results effectively. However, would including confidence intervals or error bars improve interpretability for readers?
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPlease see attachment
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachments
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsthanks for reflecting my comments
