Attachment and Mental Health in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Posttraumatic Growth and Religion as Moderators

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a fascinating paper. The findings are compelling, and it should be published. The revision I recommend focuses on the introduction. The separate aspects of PTG, attachment, and religion could be integrated better. That is, a more consistent and developed framework could be presented supporting the research being conducted. 

Author Response

This is a fascinating paper. The findings are compelling, and it should be published.

Thank you for the kind feedback.

The revision I recommend focuses on the introduction. The separate aspects of PTG, attachment, and religion could be integrated better. That is, a more consistent and developed framework could be presented supporting the research being conducted.

Thank you. We have updated the Present Study section to include a better integration of the literature review in support of the theoretical model (p. 4). We have also highlighted sections throughout the Introduction which connect different areas of the literature. 

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a very interesting study. You can see that the authors have put a lot of work into shaping the article and the details. It is very structured. The only considerations proposed are the following:

• When describing the materials, I would consider the term "Instruments" instead of materials.
• Also, within this section, the concept of Loneliness should be put in another line.
• A section on data analysis is missing, describing the type of statistical analysis that has been carried out and the statistical program used. All this is included in the methodology, before the Results. 
• It is recommended to use impersonal tenses (third person singular) instead of the first person plural (e.g. We also...).

Thank you very much for your time and work. 

Author Response

This is a very interesting study. You can see that the authors have put a lot of work into shaping the article and the details. It is very structured. The only considerations proposed are the following:
Thank you very much.

When describing the materials, I would consider the term "Instruments" instead of materials.
Thank you for the feedback. We used the term “materials” as it was the term that appeared in the template provided by the journal. As such, we have chosen to keep this term in keeping with the template.

Also, within this section, the concept of Loneliness should be put in another line.

Thank you. We have made this change.

A section on data analysis is missing, describing the type of statistical analysis that has been carried out and the statistical program used. All this is included in the methodology, before the Results.

Thank you for the feedback. We have included additional information about the software that we utilized for the analysis and have highlighted where we included the relevant information in the Results section (p. 6).

It is recommended to use impersonal tenses (third person singular) instead of the first person plural (e.g. We also...).

Thank you for this feedback. Our manuscript was written following the guidelines of the APA Publication Manual, Seventh Edition. The use of the first person pronouns are addressed in   Section 4.16 (https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/grammar/first-person-pronouns).