Determinant Factors of Entrepreneurial Culture in University Students: An Analysis from the Theory of Planned Behavior at a Peruvian University
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI would suggest two minor changes
1) Rephrase introduction parts that refer to social entrepreneurship as it gives the reader the initial impression that types of entrepreneurial activities are also considered in the analysis. A more general discussion throughout this part is more appropriate.
2) I would suggest that “positive” is added before attitudes in the relevant hypotheses.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Minor editing is required
Author Response
Lima, October 18, 2024
Dear Reviewer,
We deeply appreciate your valuable comments and suggestions provided
during the evaluation of our manuscript titled "Determinant Factors of
Entrepreneurial Culture in University Students: An Analysis from the Theory of
Planned Behavior at a Peruvian University." We have carefully reviewed the
document and made the necessary revisions to address each of your
observations. Below is a detailed summary of the changes made:
Reformulation of the Introduction: We have revised the introduction to
remove explicit references to social entrepreneurship and adopt a more general
approach focused on university entrepreneurship. This ensures that the reader
does not interpret the analysis as including other types of business activities, but
instead remains centered on university entrepreneurship. With these
adjustments, we maintain the study's main objectives: entrepreneurial culture,
self-efficacy, and institutional support in the context of university students in Peru.
Incorporation of the term "positive" in the hypotheses: In response to
your suggestion, we have added the term "positive" in the hypotheses related to
attitudes towards innovation and creativity. This ensures that the hypotheses
more clearly reflect a focus on positive attitudes, improving both clarity and
conceptual coherence in hypotheses H1, H2, H3, H4, and H12.
Thank you for your comments regarding the quality of the English
language. We appreciate the suggestion to make a minor edit, and we have
reviewed the language to ensure greater clarity and precision. If there are specific
areas that require further improvement, please let us know, and we will make the
necessary adjustments to enhance the overall quality of the manuscript.
We are confident that these changes enhance the quality of the
manuscript, and we hope that the revisions meet your expectations. We remain
available for any further feedback you may have.
Sincerely,
Kerwin Jose Chavez Vera
Joel Joad Alderete Velita
Tomás Alcalá Martinez
Raúl Marcelo Ferre
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript, "Determinant Factors of Entrepreneurial Culture in University Students: An Analysis from the Theory of Planned Behaviour at a Peruvian University," provides a relevant exploration of entrepreneurial culture in higher education in Peru. It uses the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to analyse factors influencing students’ entrepreneurial intentions. Several improvements are suggested to enhance clarity and coherence.
The introduction lays a solid foundation but would benefit from more comparisons with studies on entrepreneurial culture in other regions, especially within Latin America, to place the findings in a broader context. While the TPB framework is well-applied, it would be useful to further elaborate on how the model’s components—attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control—are influenced by the socio-economic conditions and cultural factors specific to Peru.
The research questions are formulated but should be more prominently featured in the introduction to better guide readers. More details on the validation of the questionnaire would also strengthen the methodological section, ensuring the reliability and credibility of the findings.
Improving the transitions between sections would help the manuscript flow more smoothly. It’s important to ensure that each result ties back to the initial hypotheses and to provide more balanced discussions by considering alternative interpretations or counterarguments.
Overall, the study is a valuable contribution to understanding entrepreneurial culture among university students in Peru. By addressing these suggestions, the authors can improve the manuscript’s clarity, coherence, and overall impact, making it more compelling for academic and practical audiences.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe manuscript titled "Determinant Factors of Entrepreneurial Culture in University Students: An Analysis from the Theory of Planned Behaviour at a Peruvian University" demonstrates a strong level of English proficiency, effectively communicating complex ideas related to entrepreneurial culture and the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). However, several areas could be improved to enhance clarity and readability.
While the language is generally clear and appropriate for an academic audience, some sentences are overly complex. Simplifying these longer sentences into shorter, more digestible ones would improve overall comprehension. The manuscript also uses technical jargon at times, which may not be familiar to all readers. Providing brief definitions or explanations of specialized terms when first introduced would ensure that the text is accessible to a broader audience.
Author Response
Lima, October 18, 2024
Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate the valuable comments and suggestions you
provided regarding our manuscript titled "Determinant Factors of Entrepreneurial
Culture in University Students: An Analysis from the Theory of Planned Behavior
at a Peruvian University." We are pleased that the study has been recognized as
a relevant contribution to the analysis of entrepreneurial culture in higher
education in Peru. We have carefully considered each of your recommendations
and have made the necessary adjustments to improve the manuscript. Below is
a detailed summary of the changes made:
Comparison with studies in other regions: As you suggested, we have
enriched the introduction and discussion by comparing our results with studies
on entrepreneurial culture in other Latin American regions. This inclusion better
contextualizes the findings, allowing the reader to place the results in a broader
and more relevant comparative framework.
Application of TPB in the Peruvian context: We have expanded the
explanation of how the components of TPB (attitudes, subjective norms, and
perceived behavioral control) are influenced by the specific socioeconomic and
cultural factors in Peru. This additional analysis strengthens the applicability of
the model in this particular context, highlighting differences in relation to other
environments.
Increased visibility of research questions: The research questions now
appear more prominently in the introduction, as you suggested, providing clearer
guidance to the reader from the beginning and offering a clear focus on the
study's objectives.
Additional details on the questionnaire validation: In the
methodological section, we have included a more detailed description of the
validation process of the questionnaire used, ensuring greater transparency
regarding the reliability and credibility of the findings. This, in turn, strengthens
the methodological robustness of the study.
Improved transitions and more balanced discussion:
We have revised the transitions between sections to ensure a more fluid and
cohesive flow. Additionally, the discussion now includes alternative
interpretations and counterarguments, providing a more balanced and thorough
analysis of the results obtained.
We are confident that these improvements significantly enhance the
clarity, coherence, and overall impact of the manuscript. We sincerely appreciate
your observations and remain open to any further comments you may have.
Sincerely,
Kerwin Jose Chavez Vera
Joel Joad Alderete Velita
Tomás Alcalá Martinez
Raúl Marcelo Ferrer
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
The manuscript presents a quite interesting study, but some aspects must be changed:
- the citation must be made according to the requirements of the journal
- the aim of the research must be mentioned also in the introduction part
- the section 2 must be split into two parts: the first one is the literature review part and the second one must be the one concerning the methodology, including the hypothesis, the research model, method.
- in the results part maybe the authors could comment on results obtained ….now it is not easy to understand
It would be interesting to find in the article your own proposals based on the results of the study, either in discussion part, either in conclusion part.
Kind regards
I am sure you will make a good job in implementing the specifications
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe english must be a litle bit refined!
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely thank you for your detailed comments and valuable suggestions regarding
our manuscript titled "Determinant Factors of Entrepreneurial Culture in University
Students: An Analysis from the Theory of Planned Behavior at a Peruvian University."
We have carefully reviewed each of your observations and implemented the
corresponding modifications. Below, we provide a summary of the actions taken:
Citation in accordance with the journal's requirements: We have reviewed and
adjusted all the citations in the manuscript to comply with the journal's requirements. We
ensured that the format of the references and in-text citations aligns with the editorial
guidelines provided.
Incorporation of the research objective in the introduction: As you suggested, we
have added a clear and explicit mention of the research objective in the introduction,
providing a stronger framework and clearer direction for the readers from the outset.
Division of section 2: While we understand your recommendation to divide section 2
into two parts, we believe that combining the literature review with the hypotheses and
conceptual model enhances the conceptual structure of the study. The methodology has
been addressed separately in its own section, which we believe maintains clarity without
requiring additional division.
Comments on the results: We appreciate your observation regarding the clarity of the
results. However, we believe that the way we presented them maintains a clear focus on
the key findings, allowing the reader to interpret the analysis without introducing
comparisons that could detract from the central analysis. Nonetheless, we have reviewed
the wording to ensure that the presentation of the results is clearer.
Proposals based on the study's findings: We have added our own proposals based
on the study’s findings, integrating them at the end of the conclusion section. We believe
these suggestions strengthen the practical application of the results, aligning the study
with recommendations and opportunities for improvement in the context of university
entrepreneurship in Peru.
Quality of the English language: In response to your comment about improving the
quality of the English language, we have reviewed the entire manuscript to refine the
language, ensuring greater fluency and precision. We believe that the manuscript now
meets a higher linguistic standard, as requested.
We are confident that these revisions significantly improve the quality and clarity of the
manuscript. We remain available for any additional feedback you may have.
Sincerely,
Kerwin Jose Chavez Vera
Joel Joad Alderete Velita
Tomás Alcalá Martinez
Raúl Marcelo Ferrer
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsgood job
