Addiction to New Technologies and Cyberbullying in the Costa Rican Context

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to review this manuscript. This is an interesting topic that can be considered by readers. I have few minor concerns.

a)         Improve the English form of the text

b)         To define the prevalence of cyberbullying, I suggest using a cut-off on individual data to define a subject as a "bully" or a "victim."

c)      Please explain better the meaning of the "Other reasons" cloud in the cloud diagrams; it could probably indicate a lack of clear reasons by the bully, but it could also depend on a poor choice of motivations on your part in the multiple answers test.

d)         Discuss how data could not be generalized, because of the convenience sampling

Author Response

Manuscript ID education-1993205

Title:

Addiction to new technologies and cyber-bullying in the Costa Rican context

Dear editor,

We would like to thank you for considering our work entitled “Addiction to new technologies and cyber-bullying in the Costa Rican context” as conditionally accepted for publication in Education Sciences. We want to show our gratitude to you for your support in the review process.

We would also like to thank your team of Reviewers for their valuable comments on and constructive ideas for our manuscript during the review process. We really appreciate your comments. We believe the amendments made have significantly improved the article.

We would especially like to thank the kind words of most of the reviewers about the methodological quality of our research. We are very grateful for their words as we strive to improve every research we conduct.

We have carried out the following steps in order to respond to these comments and so improve the article.

Review 1:

Thank you for the opportunity to review this manuscript. This is an interesting topic that can be considered by readers. I have few minor concerns. 

1. Improve the English form of the text

Dear Reviewer. A bilingual colleague has reviewed the text and the quality of the language. However, our native language is not English. If you think we should make further changes or you see something in particular to improve, we would be very grateful for your help.

1. b)    To define the prevalence of cyberbullying, I suggest using a cut-off on individual data to define a subject as a "bully" or a "victim."

Thank you for your comments. We have included more detailed information on these concepts in the introduction.

Cyberbullying is understood as harassment that takes place via the internet, the cyberbully is the person who engages in cyberbullying and the cybervictim is the person who suffers from it [7].

(…)

Adolescents believe that social networks lead to increased bullying and general rumor spreading [1], that is, cyberbullying.

1. c)     Please explain better the meaning of the "Other reasons" cloud in the cloud diagrams; it could probably indicate a lack of clear reasons by the bully, but it could also depend on a poor choice of motivations on your part in the multiple answers test.

Dear reviewer. Thank you for your comment. In this case, the questionnaire that was passed indicated "other reasons" as an option. We have added a brief annotation to facilitate understanding.

*The answer "other reasons" was part of the management questionnaire.

1. d)        Discuss how data could not be generalized, because of the convenience sampling.

Dear reviewer. Thank you very much for your comment. We have included your comment as a limitation. Please review the following lines.

On the other hand, there is a limitation according to the sample. The sample is a convenience sample. This sampling option was selected due to the exceptional conditions of Covid-19 and the governmental structure of the nation of Costa Rica. Consequently, the results should be taken with caution.

Reviewer 2 Report

Author Response

Manuscript ID education-1993205

Title:

Addiction to new technologies and cyber-bullying in the Costa Rican context

Dear editor,

We would like to thank you for considering our work entitled “Addiction to new technologies and cyber-bullying in the Costa Rican context” as conditionally accepted for publication in Education Sciences. We want to show our gratitude to you for your support in the review process.

We would also like to thank your team of Reviewers for their valuable comments on and constructive ideas for our manuscript during the review process. We really appreciate your comments. We believe the amendments made have significantly improved the article.

We would especially like to thank the kind words of most of the reviewers about the methodological quality of our research. We are very grateful for their words as we strive to improve every research we conduct.

We have carried out the following steps in order to respond to these comments and so improve the article.

Review 2:

Consistent and well developed 

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your kind words.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

Thank you for the opportunity to review an interesting article entitled: ‘Addiction to new technologies and cyber-bullying in the Costa Rican context’. Overall, manuscript is written clearly and sensibly, but the following points should be noted:

[1].  The notation of the terms used should be unified: cyber-bulling, cyber-victim, etc., as one time they are written with a hyphen (cyber-bulling), another time without it (cyberbulling) and another time with a space (cyber bulling).

[2].  There is no explanation of the terms used, i.e. cyber-bulling, cyber-victim, etc. I suggest adding a relevant section in the Introduction.

[3].  Line 90 should end with a dot.

[4].  There should be a dot in line 91 after H1.

[5].  In Table 1, the percentage and mean should be rounded to one decimal place and the SD to two.

[6].  There is an error in the name in line 151: it should be ADITEC, not ADITECT.

[7].  Throughout the text, the notation of results should be unified - there should be a space both before and after the = sign.

[8].  Line 197 should be 't-student', not 'T-student' (t should be in italic).

[9].  Lines 200, 201, 203 should read "R²" not "R2".

[10].  The designations, i.e. R², F, t, p, β, B, should be written in italic.

[11]. Lines 226, 228, 242, 243 lack a zero in the p-factor result.

[12]. Figure 2 should read “Cyber-bully” and “Cyber-victim”, not “Ciber-bully” and “Ciber-victim”.

[13]. Lines 288 and 340 should be FoMO, not FOMO.

Author Response

Manuscript ID education-1993205

Title:

Addiction to new technologies and cyber-bullying in the Costa Rican context

Dear editor,

We would like to thank you for considering our work entitled “Addiction to new technologies and cyber-bullying in the Costa Rican context” as conditionally accepted for publication in Education Sciences. We want to show our gratitude to you for your support in the review process.

We would also like to thank your team of Reviewers for their valuable comments on and constructive ideas for our manuscript during the review process. We really appreciate your comments. We believe the amendments made have significantly improved the article.

We would especially like to thank the kind words of most of the reviewers about the methodological quality of our research. We are very grateful for their words as we strive to improve every research we conduct.

We have carried out the following steps in order to respond to these comments and so improve the article.

Review 3:

Thank you for the opportunity to review an interesting article entitled: ‘Addiction to new technologies and cyber-bullying in the Costa Rican context’. Overall, manuscript is written clearly and sensibly, but the following points should be noted:

 [1].   The notation of the terms used should be unified: cyber-bulling, cyber-victim, etc., as one time they are written with a hyphen (cyber-bulling), another time without it (cyberbulling) and another time with a space (cyber bulling).

Dear reviewer. Thank you for your comment. We have homogenized the terms. Please check the following lines:

On the other hand, new technologies mediate the behavior of the cybervictim and especially that of cyber-aggressors, showing how they escape routes for other problems while presenting difficulties in controlling these stimuli. However, it is especially dramatic the situation of adolescents who, having been cybervictims, become cyber-aggressors showing feelings of revenge and little empathy.

Addiction to new technologies and cyberbullying in the Costa Rican context

Table 3. Average scores in cybervictimization and cyberbullying.

[2].   There is no explanation of the terms used, i.e. cyber-bulling, cyber-victim, etc. I suggest adding a relevant section in the Introduction

Thank you for your comments. We have included more detailed information on these concepts in the introduction.

Cyberbullying is understood as harassment that takes place via the internet, the cyberbully is the person who engages in cyberbullying and the cybervictim is the person who suffers from it [7].

(…)

Adolescents believe that social networks lead to increased bullying and general rumor spreading [1], that is, cyberbullying.

[3].   Line 90 should end with a dot.

Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. Please revise the following lines:

H2. Age as a protective variable.

[4].    There should be a dot in line 91 after H1.

Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. Please revise the following lines:

H1. Gender differences in the use and prevalence of internet addiction, smartphone users and videogames, being women more prone than men to this prevalence.

[5].    In Table 1, the percentage and mean should be rounded to one decimal place and the SD to two.

Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. Please revise the following lines:

[6].   There is an error in the name in line 151: it should be ADITEC, not ADITECT.

Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. Please revise the following lines:

ADITEC-Video play:

[7].   Throughout the text, the notation of results should be unified - there should be a space both before and after the = sign.

Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. Please revise the following lines:

(α = 0.82)

(α = 0.71)

(α = 0.71)

(α = 0.93).

(α = 0.93).

(α = 0.95).

[8].    Line 197 should be 't-student', not 'T-student' (t should be in italic).

Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. Please revise the following lines:

Although the correlation table (see table 5) shows how gender has a weak relationship with “Total smartphone addiction”, the type of center with the Internet abuse score, the results of the t-Student test showed nonexistence significant relationship.

[9].   Lines 200, 201, 203 should read "R²" not "R2"

Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. Please revise the following lines:

However, the results of the simple regression did show a predictive value of age such that the younger the age, the greater the probability of abusive use of the Internet (R² = 0.047; F = 6.190; t = 86.437; p = 0.014). Regarding the type of center, the regression results did not show significant differences (R² = 0.041; F = 2.627; p = 0.076). However, the father's educational training did explain 5.6% of the financial problems associated with the Smartphone usage (R² = 0.056; F = 7.372; t = 2.715; p = 0.008).

 [10].   The designations, i.e. R², F, t, p, β, B, should be written in italic.

Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. We have made the changes throughout the document.  Please revise the following lines:

(r = 0.81, p <0.001)

However, the results of the simple regression did show a predictive value of age such that the younger the age, the greater the probability of abusive use of the Internet (R² = 0.047; F = 6.190; t = 86.437; p = 0.014). Regarding the type of center, the regression results did not show significant differences (R² = 0.041; F = 2.627; p = 0.076). However, the father's educational training did explain 5.6% of the financial problems associated with the Smartphone usage (R² = 0.056; F = 7.372; t = 2.715; p = 0.008).

*p<0.05

**p<0.01

***p<0.001

[11]. Lines 226, 228, 242, 243 lack a zero in the p-factor result.

Dear Reviewer. Thank you very much, we have corrected these typos and we have homogenized the way of presenting the data. Thank you for your patience.

[12]. Figure 2 should read “Cyber-bully” and “Cyber-victim”, not “Ciber-bully” and “Ciber-victim”.

Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. Please revise the following lines:

[13]. Lines 288 and 340 should be FoMO, not FOMO.

 Dear reviewer. Thank you for yor comment. We make the change. Please revise the following lines:

For this reason, the well-known “fear of missing out” (FoMO) should not be ignored from the interpretation of the results [33]. However, our results confirm that excessive use has a high interrelation with other addictive symptoms, constituting a potentiating element.

What implications does the feeling of belonging and the FoMO have in the addictive use of technologies?