Introduction and the justification of study are able to spark interest among readers. The aim is directive and clear. Methodology and results were described clearly. The novelty of the study added value and impact to the scientific knowledge of the relevant field.

The introduction has clearly narrate the background of the study. What is already known in the fields of guided imagery, anxiety and nature has been clearly depicted. The correlation among each of the fields has been explained and presented. The research questions have been outlined clearly and justified.

The process of subject selection is clear, however a flow diagram would be necessary to better narrate the process as a whole. Variables are defined and measured appropriately. The study interventions are valid and reliable, although the amount of personnel involved in the face and content validity process is of a minimal quantity.

The data are presented in an appropriate way. Tables and figures relevant and clearly presented. The authors conveyed the statistical results and practical meaning of the results clearly.

The results discussed from multiple angles and placed into context without being overinterpreted The conclusions answer the aims and hypothesis of the study and are supported by compatible references or results. The authors narrate a "fourfold" practical impact: Limitations of the study are addressed and deemed not fatal in any sense. Opportunities for future research has been addressed. The authors mentioned that "specific mechanisms underlying the reduction in anxiety, such as the role of perception, sensory focus, memory associations and relationship to particular natural and urban environments" as well as the "long-term effects of nature-based GI interventions on anxiety levels."