Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I think this is a very important topic to explore, however, I think it is missing the "So what?" factor. Results are descriptive in nature, which is fine and needed but I wonder if a stronger argument can be made for the study rationale. 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 I would discourage authors to refer to participants as "those people" in their paper. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The reviewed article presents a relevant research on understanding suicide in young adults from Spain and Japan.

The authors conducted an interesting cross-cultural study, obtained valuable data and carried out its statistical processing.

However, I have a few comments about the presentation of the research in the article.

1. It is necessary to clarify the purpose and objectives of the study. As a rule, in cross-cultural studies, the variables under study are first compared with each other, and only then are their relationships examined.
2. Accordingly, the research hypotheses need to be clarified and substantiated. In the current version, the choice of hypotheses is unjustified. Not all results correspond to the proposed hypotheses (for example, calculations in paragraph 3.1)
3. Further, I recommend that the results should be systematized and presented in the sequence of testing hypotheses.
4. Also, all text and presented data must be carefully checked. For example, in section 2.3, conflicting data on the size of the Spanish and Japanese samples are presented on lines 141, 161, and 172.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I thank the authors for their attention to my comments. I see that the article has been significantly revised. I have no further questions for the authors.

Since the text has been significantly revised, I recommend that the authors carefully edit the final version before publication.