Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please see attached report. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to thank you for the insightful comments, which were extremely helpful in improving and clarifying our work.

Please find below attached our reply to the comments. As requested, we have submitted a revised manuscript with the changes highlighted.

Kind regards

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Overall this is important research. However there are a few areas that could be expanded to further strengthen this manuscript. 

In the introduction the author/s present the argument that interest in STEM is a major factor in diversifying STEM by gender. While interest is important, there are several other factors (i.e. environment in climate, such as the hostile climates in STEM that center masculine perspectives, sexism, bias, etc.) that contribute to the lack of gender diversity. It would be helpful to include this information so that the readers could understand the problem more holistically. While interest is important, it is not the only factor impacting the experiences of women in STEM. 

It would also be important for the author/s to unpack why women lose interest or have less interest in STEM than men. The author/s explain that there is less interest for women but do not describe why. It would be helpful to provide this context. 

 

I have no suggestions for the theoretical framework, methods, or results sections. The author/s did an excellent job of clearly presenting and structuring these sections. 

In the discussion section the statements provided in likes 381-386 offer another argument to include in the introduction. To strengthen the paper, it would be beneficial to further explore the role of external judgments, particularly in relation to the experiences of women in STEM. Expanding on how societal perceptions and biases impact their experiences would add depth to your discussion. Additionally, consider addressing how these specific interventions could effectively counteract these influences. By elaborating on these points, you can create a more compelling and nuanced argument.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to thank you for the insightful comments, which were extremely helpful in improving and clarifying our work.

Please find below attached our reply to the comments. As requested, we have submitted a revised manuscript with the changes highlighted.

Kind regards

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf