A Study on Tourist Satisfaction of Heritage Centres towards in and Around Karaikudi in Sivagangai District

B Marisamy

Assistant Professor, PG & Research Department of Commerce, Arumugam Pillai Seethai Ammal College, Thiruppattur, Sivagangai District, Tamil Nadu, India

Peer Review Report

Received Date


Accepted Date


Published Date



Accepted Level

Reviewer’s Comments to Authors

Major Comments

  1. There is no information on the review of related literatures. If this study is first hand study the researcher should produce valid proof or can include the reference details on the study.
  2. More number of suggestions can be given since number analysis is more. And given suggestions should be based on the major findings/observation of the study.
  3. Given conclusion is just summarizing the title. Conclusion part of the study is not concluding the title properly. It should conclude what is the satisfaction level of Karaikudi heritage centres and what could be done to improve the status and number of tourists arriving there.
  4. The criterion (Very Good, Good, Bad and Very Bad) fixed for table 3 does not match with the factors given for example Lack of accommodation, Heavy traffic problem for food, Mugging of Tourist and Extra Charges. For these factors if any of the criteria is fixed will mean for same meaning or meaningless. So, the author should focus on that point of mismatch and should give correct point of classification to measurement criteria.

Minor Comments

  1. There was no mention of the limitations of the study, one of which is the apparently high dropout rate.
  2. There is no information on data collection, period of study, techniques used for collecting the data, footnote and findings for the study. The author should focus on the above mentioned parts which are mainly needed for a research study.
  3. For every reference there should be a footnote in the relevant pages.
  4. Researcher can be highlight the research gap and pave the way for future research.