Next Article in Journal
A Hierarchical Decision-Making Method with a Fuzzy Ant Colony Algorithm for Mission Planning of Multiple UAVs
Next Article in Special Issue
Social Media Marketing in Creative Industries: How to Use Social Media Marketing to Promote Computer Games?
Previous Article in Journal
Adversarial Hard Attention Adaptation
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Usage of Smartphone and Mobile Applications from the Point of View of Customers in Poland
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Information
Volume 11
Issue 4
10.3390/info11040225
Review Report
information-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

Printed Edition

A printed edition of this Special Issue is available at MDPI Books....
share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Digital Media: Empowerment and Equality

Information 2020, 11(4), 225; https://doi.org/10.3390/info11040225
by Magdalena Mądra-Sawicka 1,*, Jeretta Horn Nord 2, Joanna Paliszkiewicz 3 and Tzong-Ru Lee 4
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Information 2020, 11(4), 225; https://doi.org/10.3390/info11040225
Submission received: 13 March 2020 / Revised: 3 April 2020 / Accepted: 15 April 2020 / Published: 18 April 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Knowledge Management, Trust and Communication in the Era of Social Media)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I think the paper should be considered for publication, after a minor revision.

The literature review should be linked more to the research questions and introduction.

Methods should be better described.

Also, I suggest revising the discussion of the implications, highlighting result importance and the stream of studies you are contributing.

 

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions in detail, which provide us with clear directions in our revision of this paper. We have made changes based on your comments and believe that the revised paper meets your expectations. Our responses to your comments are given below.

 

Reviewer

The literature review should be linked more to the research questions and introduction.

Reply:

Thank you very much for your comment. We improved the introduction in that field.

 

 

Reviewer

Methods should be better described.

Reply:

Thank you very much for your comment. We've added justification of usage in the study the Brown-Forsythe and Levene's tests in the methodology part (now line 157-163).

 

 

Reviewer

Also, I suggest revising the discussion of the implications, highlighting result importance and the stream of studies you are contributing

Thank you very much for your comment. We've added the implications in the conclusion part (line 344-346), and we highlighted the importance of the article in a separate paragraph (line 347-351).

 

We thank you once again for your useful advice and suggestions.

Authors

Reviewer 2 Report

Overall, this paper is a good read. One minor recommendation is to clearly include the used sample size i.e. how many women and men were surveyed.

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions in detail, which provide us with clear directions in our revision of this paper. We have made changes based on your comments and believe that the revised paper meets your expectations. Our responses to your comments are given below.

 

Reviewer

Overall, this paper is a good read. One minor recommendation is to clearly include the used sample size i.e. how many women and men were surveyed

Reply:

Thank you very much for your comment. We have this information in the 3.1. Instrument and materials part.

Thank you very much for Your suggestion in reviewing process

Authors

Back to TopTop