Leveraging Technology Enhancement: The Well-Being Emotional Intelligence, Security Keys to the University Students’ Readiness in Digital Learning Ecosystem
, Desi Setiana 4,5,*, Norainna Besar 4, Muhamad Najib Ali 2,3, Alifya Kayla Shafa Susanto 2,3, Rozaidin Seruddin 3 and Fahmi Ibrahim 3Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this article, the authors describe the results of a study whose purpose is to examine whether there is a significant relationship between students' preparation for the digital learning ecosystem and their levels of emotional intelligence via a correlational research method and multiple linear regression analysis. The research work presented by the authors, remains original since, in terms of plagiarism assessment, about 26% of this document consists of text more or less similar to the content of the sources considered most relevant by iThenticate. The subject is interesting, and the methodology is appropriate for this category of research. The manuscript is written in a very clear and interesting manner. It is well organized and structured. The results are clearly presented. References are cited according to the authors' instructions. Overall, the results are interesting and deserve to be published in the sustainability after two minor revisions.
Ø The conclusion should not contain any references.
Ø Reword some parts of the text to reduce the rate of plagiarism.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
::.. Thank you for your constructive feedback and reviewer comments.
We have improved the paper and carefully proof read it. We highly appreciate your comments and definitely they lead us to significantly improve the paper.
Furthermore, we also accommodate to restructuring the paper as your advice and mentioned. The most significant amendments are formal and content argument to help us interpret the Literature review, Result, discussion, Conclusion and Recommendation, Parts.
The most significant amendments are formal and content argument to help us interpret the findings. We have improved the paper and carefully proof read it.
We think with reviewers suggestion the paper looks much better. Honestly, we learn from reviewer comments to improve our paper.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In Section 2.1. This study uses a correlational research method to examine the 333 relationships between two or more variables.
why it's important explain it.
This study also conducted 336 multiple linear regression analyses. What is the advantage of using this? need proper readers understanding discussion?
In section 2.3
The first part of the survey uses [36] OLRS which consists of five different dimensions known as self-directed learning (5 items), learning motivation (4 items), learner 367 control (3 items), computer/internet self-efficacy (3 items), and online communication 368 self-efficacy (3 items).
Form (TEIS-SF) to assess four EI traits: well-being (6 items), self-control (6 items), emotionality (8 items), and sociability (6 items).
These items can be listed for readers understanding in Appendix (important one)otherwise explaining one or two of each item within the article text itself well and good.
In section 2.4
In the pilot study what suggestions given by Two experts in "educational psychology can be discussed in generic at least if not point by point specifically?
In Section 3. This study utilized a correlational research method and multiple linear regression analysis. Explain this first before the details of all results discussion. why and what for?
In Section 5 conclusion didn't mention the limitations of this study. why -must be added to say precise limit this study work?
like all H1 to H5 has supported everything positively concluded results no negative hypothesis that can be discussed in limitation too?
Author Response
::.. Thank you for your constructive feedback and reviewer comments.
We have improved the paper and carefully proof read it. We highly appreciate your comments and definitely they lead us to significantly improve the paper.
Furthermore, we also accommodate to restructuring the paper as your advice and mentioned. The most significant amendments are formal and content argument to help us interpret the Literature review, Result, discussion, Conclusion and Recommendation, Parts.
The most significant amendments are formal and content argument to help us interpret the findings. We have improved the paper and carefully proof read it.
We think with reviewers suggestion the paper looks much better. Honestly, we learn from reviewer comments to improve our paper.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
In the study a relatively small sample size of 103 students from higher institutions in Brunei is used, this sample size is very small and places significant limitations on generalization of the findings to other contexts.
Based on the evidence provided a causal relationship cannot be established between emotional intelligence and online learning readiness.
The study predominantly relies on self-reported measures of emotional intelligence and online learning readiness, the measures are highly susceptible to be subject to bias and inaccuracies.
The authors do not provide any detailed discussion of how to implement strategies to promote emotional intelligence in digital learning environments and the resources required.
The manuscript requires significant editing to rectify English language errors.
Author Response
::.. Thank you for your constructive feedback and reviewer comments.
We have improved the paper and carefully proof read it. We highly appreciate your comments and definitely they lead us to significantly improve the paper.
Furthermore, we also accommodate to restructuring the paper as your advice and mentioned. The most significant amendments are formal and content argument to help us interpret the Literature review, Result, discussion, Conclusion and Recommendation, Parts.
The most significant amendments are formal and content argument to help us interpret the findings. We have improved the paper and carefully proof read it.
We think with reviewers suggestion the paper looks much better. Honestly, we learn from reviewer comments to improve our paper.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
I have checked the revised version of the manuscript, I believe that it has been sufficiently improved to warrant publication.
The manuscript requires some editing to rectify English language errors.
