Academic Editor Notes
Abstract
- The abstract should contain information consistent with the goal and results of the research. It needs to be reconsidered. More specifically, please re-write the following sentence lns. 17-20. It’s too long and does not clearly states the purpose of the study. Also the results of the mediation model is not clearly stated. The authors are advised to re-write the results in the abstract section.
Introduction
2. Hypotheses should be rearranged as paragraphs instead of being separately written in the text. The way the hypotheses are formulated reminds a master thesis than a research paper. The authors are advised to delete hypothesis 1,2, 3 etc and re-write the hypotheses of the study.
3. The aim of this research, how it will contribute to the field, and the original value of the research and research questions should be expressed more clearly.
Method
4. The method section should be reordered according to the journal template.
5. It is necessary to present the methods and techniques in detail in order to achieve the aims and objectives envisaged in the research.
6. More detailed information about measurement tools is needed. The validity and reliability information of the original scales should be added. The authors are advised in the measures section to add the alpha reliabilities of the questionnaires.
7. The data analysis section should be reconsidered. The analyzes performed in the data analysis section should be written and explained in order. For example, if confirmatory factor analysis has been completed, it should be written in this section and the names of the fit indices, and the accepted ranges should be stated in this section.
8. The processing routes are not well understood. Are all of these operations performed on the same data set? Please, provide more detailed information about this. All analyses should be reorganized in accordance with the purpose of the research. It looks like the item analysis title should actually be confirmatory factor analysis. Why and how was SEM analysis performed? Why was it needed? Many analyzes are mentioned. It seems appropriate to gather them under a single heading. In fact, path analysis alone appears to be sufficient.
Results
9. Results and Discussion sections should be arranged separately. (see; 3. Results and Discussion, 3.6. Discussion). All sections should be reordered according to the journal template.
10. The explanation of all abbreviations in the table should be added as a "note" at the bottom of the table.
11. Numerical representations in the text need to be checked and corrected. For example, it should be written 0.7 instead of .7
Discussion
12. The Discussion section should be restructured to discuss all statistical analysis results followed in the study.
学术编辑笔记
摘要
1.摘要应包含与研究目标和结果一致的信息。它需要重新考虑。更具体地说，请重写以下句子lns。17-20。它太长了，没有明确说明研究的目的。调解模型的结果也没有明确说明。建议作者在摘要部分重写结果。
简介
2.假设应重新排列为段落，而不是单独写在正文中。假设形成的方式提醒了硕士论文而不是研究论文。建议作者删除假设1,2、3等，并重写研究假设。
3.本研究的目的，它将如何为该领域做出贡献，以及研究和研究问题的原始价值应该更清楚地表达出来。
方法
4.方法部分应根据日记账模板重新排序。
5.为了实现研究中设想的目的和目标，有必要详细介绍方法和技术。
6.需要更多关于测量工具的详细信息。应增加原始量表的有效性和可靠性信息。建议作者在测量部分添加调查问卷的 α 信度。
7.应重新考虑数据分析部分。应按顺序编写和解释数据分析部分中执行的分析。例如，如果验证性因素分析已经完成，它应该写在本节和拟合指数的名称中，并且可接受的范围应该在本节中陈述。
8.加工路线没有被很好地理解。所有这些操作是否都在同一数据集上执行？请提供有关此的更多详细信息。所有分析应根据研究目的进行重组。看起来项目分析标题实际上应该是验证性因素分析。为什么以及如何进行SEM分析？为什么需要它？提到了许多分析。将它们收集在一个标题下似乎是合适的。事实上，仅路径分析就足够了。
结果
9.结果和讨论部分应分开安排。(见; 3.结果和讨论，3.6。讨论)。所有部分应根据日记账模板重新排序。
10.表格中所有缩写的解释应作为 “注释” 添加到表格的底部。
11.文本中的数字表示需要检查和更正。例如，应该写0.7而不是.7
讨论
12.讨论部分应进行重组，以讨论研究中遵循的所有统计分析结果。
