The Impact of Subjective Well-Being on Sustainable Actions: Resilience as a Mediator Between Spirituality and Happiness in Future Environmental Engineers in Peru

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The aim of the reviewed article is to explore the mediating role of resilience in the relationship between spirituality and happiness among environmental engineering students. The study was conducted in northern Peru. The manuscript is carefully written, contains all the required elements (objective, hypotheses, limitations). However, it requires some editorial and substantive corrections. The main comments that can contribute to improving the quality of the article:

1. In my opinion, the title of the article is too long. I propose shortening it. It should be noted in the title that the study was conducted in Peru.

2. In the abstract, information about the values of the parameters and their significance (placed in brackets) should be removed. This information is included in the text of the article. This information should also be removed from the Conclusions. These are unnecessary repetitions.

3. The methods used should be described in more detail and appropriate formulas and models should be provided.

4. All references to literature and literature should be formatted in accordance with the requirements of the journal Sustainability.

Author Response

Revisor 1.

Observation 1. In my opinion, the title of the article is too long. I propose shortening it. It should be noted in the title that the study was conducted in Peru.

Response: Thank you for your observation and suggestion. Regarding the word length of the title, it only has 21 words. And we proceeded to add the context of the study, so we added “Peruvians” to indicate that the future environmental engineers surveyed are Peruvians.

Observation 2. In the abstract, information about the values of the parameters and their significance (placed in brackets) should be removed. This information is included in the text of the article. This information should also be removed from the Conclusions. These are unnecessary repetitions.

Response: Thank you for your comment, the pertinent changes have been made.

Observation 3. The methods used should be described in more detail and appropriate formulas and models should be provided.

Response: We appreciate the reviewer's suggestion to provide more detail in the methodological description. In response to his comment, we would like to point out the following:

The study rigorously follows the guidelines for reporting structural equation models with PLS-SEM, using standardized formulas and procedures that include:

1. Reliability analysis through Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability (CR) 2.
2. Convergent validity through factor loadings and average variance extracted (AVE).
3. Discriminant validity using the Fornell-Larcker criterion and the HTMT ratio.
4. Model fit indices, including SRMR, d_ULS, d_G, χ2/df and NFI.

The results of these analyses are reported in detail in Tables 2, 3 and 4, following the conventions established in the specialized literature (Hair et al., 2017; Fornell & Larcker, 1981). While we recognize the importance of methodological transparency, the specific formulas for these procedures are widely known and documented in the cited papers, so including them may be redundant given space constraints.

Observation 4. All references to literature and literature should be formatted in accordance with the requirements of the journal Sustainability.

Response: Thank you for your comment, the literature and bibliography update was performed.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper examines the impact of subjective well-being on sustainable actions, with a particular focus on the mediating role of resilience between spirituality and well-being among environmental engineering students in northern Peru. It highlights the importance of these factors for sustainability in education and career development. Through a quantitative cross-sectional study involving 392 students from public and private universities, the study tests two key hypotheses: the direct influence of spirituality on well-being and the mediating effect of resilience. The research employs validated instruments, including the Spirituality Personal Inventory (SPI), the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale short version (CD-RISC 10), and the Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS).

 

Overall, I believe the paper is suitable for publication; however, the following revisions and improvements must be made prior to publication:

 

1.The study employs a cross-sectional design, which limits the ability to infer causality. This means the study cannot observe the time-based impact of subjective well-being on sustainable actions. A longitudinal study is necessary to address this limitation？

2.The study sample primarily consists of environmental engineering students from northern Peru, which may restrict the generalizability of the findings. How can the broader applicability of the research be improved?

3.The study does not consider variables such as personality traits and organizational support structures, which might provide a more comprehensive understanding of sustainable actions. Future research should explore the impact of these variables on sustainable career motivations.

4.What is the paper’s relationship with sustainability?

5.There is a lack of a research limitations section.

Author Response

Revisor 2.

Observation 1. The study employs a cross-sectional design, which limits the ability to infer causality. This means the study cannot observe the time-based impact of subjective well-being on sustainable actions. A longitudinal study is necessary to address this limitation？

Response: Thank you for your comment, I have integrated and clarified this limitation in the study.

Observation 2. The study sample primarily consists of environmental engineering students from northern Peru, which may restrict the generalizability of the findings. How can the broader applicability of the research be improved?

Response: Thank you for your comment, I have integrated and clarified this limitation in the study.

Observation 3. The study does not consider variables such as personality traits and organizational support structures, which might provide a more comprehensive understanding of sustainable actions. Future research should explore the impact of these variables on sustainable career motivations.

Response: Thank you for your comment, I have integrated and clarified this limitation in the study.

Observation 4. What is the paper’s relationship with sustainability?

Response: Thanks for the observation, the study is related to sustainability. That is why this relationship was added in the conclusions.

Observation 5. There is a lack of a research limitations section

Response: This section was included in the study. Thank you for your observation.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a path analysis with mediation study

The literature support is appropriate - no recommendations

The sample size is adequate - no recommendations

The analysis methods are appropriate - no recommendations.

The findings are appropriate to test the hypotheses - no recommendations

The discussion sections are appropriate - no recommendations

Author Response

Revisor 3

Response: Thank you for your appreciation of the quality of our manuscript.