Gender Differences in University Students’ Levels of Physical Activity and Motivations to Engage in Physical Activity
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you very much for the opportunity to review this manuscript. According to my point of review, there are some minor points that would improve the quality of this manuscript, as the following:
ABSTRACT
I suggest the author(s) to name the questionnaires and statistical analysis used in their study.
RESULTS
“Gender differences on PA levels are shown in Table I” and “Motivational domains according to gender are shown in Table II”, I suggest the author(s) to change it to Table 1 and Table 2 and match it with tables titles.
The paper is well written and organized.
Author Response
Dear editors and reviewers,
First of all, we would like to thank you so much for your suggestions and comments. All of them have been very enriching and have contributed to improve the original version.
You will be able to identify in red-coloured text all the changes implemented in the manuscript.
Should you consider we need to make any further changes, do not hesitate to make us know. We will be very pleased.
REVIEWER 1
Thank you very much for the opportunity to review this manuscript. According to my point of review, there are some minor points that would improve the quality of this manuscript, as the following:
ABSTRACT
I suggest the author(s) to name the questionnaires and statistical analysis used in their study.
Included
RESULTS
“Gender differences on PA levels are shown in Table I” and “Motivational domains according to gender are shown in Table II”, I suggest the author(s) to change it to Table 1 and Table 2 and match it with tables titles.
Modified
The paper is well written and organized
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
First of all, I would like to thank you for the effort you have put into the preparation of the manuscript entitled: Gender differences in university students' levels of physical activity and motivations to engage in physical activity. The study was aimed to analyse the levels of physical activity and the types of motivation for physical activity among university students according to gender.
I would be grateful if you consider the following comments derived from my review of the manuscript:
1) Based on the "Microsoft Word template" of the journal, the name of the authors and their affiliation are missing at the beginning of the manuscript. Other sections are also missing at the end of the manuscript: Author Contributions, Funding, Institutional Review Board Statement, Informed Consent Statement, Conflicts of Interest, etc.
2) The p value of the statistical tests cannot be equal to 0.00. No matter how much lower the value is, it can never be 0. Instead of writing: p=.00, you should write p≤0.001. Revise the entire manuscript in this regard.
3) In lines 11, 13 and 208 a first person plural personal pronoun (we) has been used. In scientific texts the third person singular/plural or indirect style should be used.
4) Line 36 mentions: (Eurobarometer, 2022). I consider that including reference 12 is sufficient and the information in parentheses can be deleted.
5) I believe that in the manuscript the terms "demotivation" and "amotivation" are used to refer to the same thing. It would be convenient to unify the terminology and use one word or the other throughout the manuscript.
6) Order and correctly cite the number of references used in the text. For example, in line 75 it says: [27,28, 29, 4, 14, 21]. It should read: [4, 14, 21, 27-29]. Revise the entire manuscript in this regard.
7) Point 2.2 should be called "instruments" instead of "procedures".
8) The wording in lines 127-128 (The statistical analysis...) should go at the beginning of section 2.3.
9) Tables 1 and 2 do not follow the format established by the journal. Vertical lines should be deleted.
10) The research aim drafted in lines 151-153 is confusing. Write the aim as worded on lines 78-79.
11) The limitations of the study are mentioned in the paragraph on lines 208-214. It cannot be considered a limitation not to know the causes of having greater or lesser motivation to practice physical activity because this is not related to the research aim.
12) Lines 225-228 should be preceded by the heading title: “5. Conclusions”.
I would like you to take into consideration all the comments made after the revision of the manuscript.
Kind regards
Author Response
Dear editors and reviewers,
First of all, we would like to thank you so much for your suggestions and comments. All of them have been very enriching and have contributed to improve the original version.
You will be able to identify in red-coloured text all the changes implemented in the manuscript.
Should you consider we need to make any further changes, do not hesitate to make us know. We will be very pleased.
REVIEWER 2
First of all, I would like to thank you for the effort you have put into the preparation of the manuscript entitled: Gender differences in university students' levels of physical activity and motivations to engage in physical activity. The study was aimed to analyse the levels of physical activity and the types of motivation for physical activity among university students according to gender.
I would be grateful if you consider the following comments derived from my review of the manuscript:
- Based on the "Microsoft Word template" of the journal, the name of the authors and their affiliation are missing at the beginning of the manuscript. Other sections are also missing at the end of the manuscript: Author Contributions, Funding, Institutional Review Board Statement, Informed Consent Statement, Conflicts of Interest, etc.
In accordance with the peer review policy, the reviewer may have received the manuscript anonymised and therefore these data are not included, but the journal disposes of them.
- The p value of the statistical tests cannot be equal to 0.00. No matter how much lower the value is, it can never be 0. Instead of writing: p=.00, you should write p≤0.001. Revise the entire manuscript in this regard.
Modified
- In lines 11, 13 and 208 a first person plural personal pronoun (we) has been used. In scientific texts the third person singular/plural or indirect style should be used.
Modified
- Line 36 mentions: (Eurobarometer, 2022). I consider that including reference 12 is sufficient and the information in parentheses can be deleted.
Modified
- I believe that in the manuscript the terms "demotivation" and "amotivation" are used to refer to the same thing. It would be convenient to unify the terminology and use one word or the other throughout the manuscript.
Modified. We have used "amotivation" throughout the manuscript.
- Order and correctly cite the number of references used in the text. For example, in line 75 it says: [27,28, 29, 4, 14, 21]. It should read: [4, 14, 21, 27-29]. Revise the entire manuscript in this regard.
Modified
- Point 2.2 should be called "instruments" instead of "procedures".
Modified
- The wording in lines 127-128 (The statistical analysis...) should go at the beginning of section 2.3.
Modified
- Tables 1 and 2 do not follow the format established by the journal. Vertical lines should be deleted.
Modified
- The research aim drafted in lines 151-153 is confusing. Write the aim as worded on lines 78-79.
Modified
- The limitations of the study are mentioned in the paragraph on lines 208-214. It cannot be considered a limitation not to know the causes of having greater or lesser motivation to practice physical activity because this is not related to the research aim.
In accordance with the reviewer's justification, we have removed this limitation.
- Lines 225-228 should be preceded by the heading title: “5. Conclusions”.
Included
Sincerely,
