Effect of Informational Divergence on the Mental Health of the Population in Crisis Situations: A Study in COVID-19

Comments 1: This article is clever and creates an approach to informational divergence that could be used in a variety of studies.  The findings are compelling.

Response 1: We appreciate the reviewer's validation of our findings.

Comments 2: My request for revision deals primarily with Section 3.3. Here it is not clear what the threshold is to be regarded as influential and how many observations are involved in the tables. While the conclusions are quite likely correct, not know how many observations are tied to each emotion by date leaves open the possibility that the most influential themes are only a small percent of the references in the overall emotion. The tables could add a N for each date, or perhaps there could be an appendix.

Response 2:

Thank you for this methodological observation. Figure 6 now shows the temporal evolution of emotions as proportions of daily communications. We have maintained the original format of Tables 1-5 as they serve a different purpose: documenting specific, representative communications that exemplify each emotional response. These qualitative examples complement the quantitative temporal analysis shown in Figure 6. The combination of normalized time series data with carefully selected representative communications provides a comprehensive view of emotional patterns during the crisis period. The normalization as proportions addresses concerns about sample size variations. These changes can be found in page 7, lines 207 - 222

Comments 1: I am glad to be able to assess your scientific work, which requires only a few additions.

Response 1: We appreciate the reviewer's validation of our findings.

Comments 2: It would be appropriate to sort the keywords alphabetically.

Response 2: We have updated the keywords to sort them alphabetically.

Comments 3: The introduction seems to me to be short and general with an insufficient explanation of the need and potential contribution of your scientific study. Despite the stated goal, it would be appropriate to determine the research questions or hypotheses based on the data obtained.

Response 3: We have thoroughly restructured the introduction to strengthen its theoretical and research framework. A more comprehensive discussion now distinguishes information divergence from related concepts like misinformation and disinformation. The revised introduction enhances the empirical grounding by incorporating preliminary data analysis that informed the development of testable hypotheses. These hypotheses examine the relationship between contradictory information and negative emotional responses, the correlation patterns between different types of divergence and specific emotional manifestations, and the impact of coordinated communication efforts on fostering positive emotional responses.

Comments 4: The tables should also include information on whether they were taken from other sources or whether they are your own processing.

Response 4: We have added an attribution statement in section 3.3 where we clarify that Tables 1-5, which present representative communications for each emotional response, are based on this research's empirical data collection and analysis.

Comments 5: The theoretical basis is relatively weak, it would be good to strengthen it with more sources - more current works from Web of Science and Scopus. I recommend taking into account online available works such as: Peráček T. & Kaššaj M. (2023). A Critical Analysis of the Rights and Obligations of the Manager of a Limited Liability Company: Managerial Legislative Basis. LAWS. 12 (3):56. pp. 1-21. doi: 10.3390/laws12030056

Semigina, T., Maidannyk, O., Onischyk, Y. , Zhuravel, Y. 2020. Local self-government reforms in Europe: legal aspects of considering the communities' social identity. Juridical Tribune, 10(2), pp. 207–221

Response 5: We appreciate the suggestion to incorporate additional references, particularly the works by Peráček & Kaššaj (2023) and Semigina et al. (2020). While these papers present valuable insights in their respective fields, their focus on managerial legislative frameworks and local self-government reforms falls outside the core scope of our study on information divergence and mental health impacts during health crises. Our manuscript currently includes 35 peer-reviewed references specifically addressing crisis communication, information management, and psychological impacts during public health emergencies, providing a targeted theoretical foundation for our research questions. We maintain that the current reference framework appropriately supports our study's specific focus on emotional responses to information divergence during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Comments 6: The second chapter “2. Materials and Methods” deserves more attention. Scientific research methods should be described and characterized, including justification of their significance of use (analysis, synthesis, deduction, comparison, induction) in a specific part of the manuscript. See the above-mentioned work Peráček & Kaššaj 2023 as an example.

Response 6: We have substantially restructured the Materials and Methods section to enhance methodological clarity and justification. The section now features two distinct subsections: 2.1 Methodological Framework and 2.2 Data Collection and Analysis. The Methodological Framework subsection now provides theoretical grounding for our mixed-methods approach, justifying the selection of digital ecosystems as data sources and explaining the integration of quantitative and qualitative techniques. We detail how this framework enables systematic processing of heterogeneous data while maintaining analytical rigor. The Data Collection and Analysis subsection maintains the technical specifications of our methods while adding clear justifications for each analytical choice.

Comments 7: In the discussion or in the supplemented conclusion, answer the stated research questions and/or hypotheses. I recommend that your manuscript be supplemented with a section dealing with the direction of your further research. It would also be appropriate to state the limitations of your research or this study.

Response 7: We have expanded the Discussion section to address the reviewer's concerns. First, we added a detailed analysis of our research hypotheses, systematically examining how our findings validate the relationship between information divergence patterns and emotional responses in digital ecosystems. We also included a paragraph addressing the study's limitations, acknowledging temporal and geographical constraints of focusing on Spain during March-April 2020, and discussing methodological considerations of digital ecosystem analysis. Additionally, we incorporated a future research directions paragraph that outlines opportunities for cross-cultural comparative studies and longitudinal investigations of mental health impacts during crises.

Comments 8: Please unify the designation of your manuscript, i.e. is it a paper, study, article?.

Response 8: We have standardized the terminology throughout the manuscript to consistently use "study" as the designation, as this term best reflects our empirical research approach examining emotional responses to information divergence during the COVID-19 crisis.