The Influence of Social Presence in Online Classes Using Virtual Conferencing: Relationships between Group Cohesion, Group Efficacy, and Academic Performance
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Title of the article:
Does Social Presence Promote Group Performance in a Virtual 2 Environment? The Effects of Group Cohesion and Social Presence on Group Efficacy and Academic Performance
The article deals with a very important issue now, which forces the transfer of teaching to the online sphere, and that is the promotion of belonging to a group of students. The article is written at a high level and meets all aspects for publication in a prestigious magazine.
I have the following questions:
In schools, the number of pupils in a class is around 20 (sometimes more than 30). You created 3 to 4 member groups in the study. Didn't this small number of group members positively influence relationship building and thus the sense of social presence?
What is the critical value of the number of students in a group to create a sense of social presence?
Small comments:
1) References to literature 1 - 6 the year of publication is missing.
2) I propose to rename Chapter 5.1 to Data Processing Method.
Author Response
Authors' responses to what the Reviewer pointed out are attached.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The title is long, what make a bit complicated the understanding. The abstract follows a good structure and the theorical background is full of good references, perhaps some more of 2020 could be added. Where “See Figure 1” I would add below the figure 1 to make it clearer. The method is well developed, and the validation tool is explained. I would suggest adding in Line 405 a reference, which study? The questionnaire for measuring group efficacy (7 question), does not specified the questions, so is difficult to understand if it drives the research to resolve the hypothesis. The results are well explained, and the conclusion give a new point of view to the scientific community. Major revision is suggested:
- Rethink the title
- Add more references from 2020 even 2021
- Review line 191 and 405
- Specify the questions of the questionnaire and the variables analyze
Author Response
Authors' responses to what the Reviewer pointed out are attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
This is a good and timely study. The main limitation, as the authors themselves point out, is that all subjects are female, probably of more or less the same age, and from a similar cultural background. It would be interesting to see if the results also hold for groups whose members are of different genders, different ages, and come from different cultural backgrounds.
The other issue is whether the effects found in this study in a virtual environment also hold in face-to-face interactions.
Author Response
Authors' responses to what the Reviewer pointed out are attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The abstract follows a good structure and the theorical background is full of good references, some more from 2020 were included. The method is well developed, and the validation tool is explained. All the methodological chnages were done. The results are well explained, and the conclusion give a new point of view to the scientific community.
