Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I suggested that the authors of the article address the ambiguity by expanding the methodology section to provide more details about how the questionnaire was constructed within the context of the conceptual framework and to elucidate the data analysis process. The authors responded that they have addressed the ambiguity regarding the development of the questionnaire in the modified methodology section. However, it is still not sufficiently expanded to provide a deep understanding of the instrument. The dimensions tested in the questionnaire should be clearly included and justified in the text. Therefore, additional tables should be included in the Materials and Methods section to better describe the research instruments used. Furthermore, the data analysis process, including codification and other relevant steps, is not described in this section.

Do not use bold and capital letters for codes "CONNECTIONS, USEFUL, PERSPECTIVE, EXPOSURE, AWARENESS" but instead use inverted commas.

Author Response

please see the attached

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

please refer to the comments/suggestions in the article

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

please see attached

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf