Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript presents a qualitative analysis of decoding and spelling errors in three Swedish students. Conclusions are drawn based on the periods of time when writing is not occurring, which are effectively used for decoding tasks instead of planning or revising the message.

Strengths
- Theme
- Introduction
- Conclusions

Limitations
- Abstract
- Method
- Results

Aspects for improvement: Title and Abstract:
1. Define the objective more clearly in the abstract.
2. Include the design and procedure in the abstract.
Theoretical Introduction:
1. The expression “technical aspects” (line 25, page 1) should be replaced with a more appropriate term, such as: mechanical, sublexical, etc.

2. Including the methodology and objectives of the study at the beginning of the introduction is redundant. Lines 38-49. If the objective of the study is to be mentioned earlier, it should be done without specifying aspects of the methodology and design. 3. In the "Current Study" section (line 297, page 5), the study's objectives, specific objectives, or hypotheses must be clearly stated.

Materials and Methods
4. This section includes several subsections that should be reduced to participants, variables and measures, procedure, and statistical design and analysis.
Participants
5. The research participants should be described, including not only age, sex, and number, but also sociocultural background, participating school, family information, prior education or reinforcement, etc.
Variables or Measures
6. The variables considered in this section, whether selection or study variables, should be presented.
Procedure
7. Ethical approval is not included in this section.
Data Design and Analysis
8. A more detailed design section may be included. 9. Include the data analysis process and statistical tests here.
Results
10. The information is presented according to the cases, not the study objectives, but it follows a clear narrative.
Discussion
Conclusions
11. Contains all the necessary ideas.

12. Possibly, if a control group without spelling difficulties had been used, it would have been possible to compare the planning and revision pauses with those of the participants with spelling difficulties, making the results clearer.
Citations and References
13. Citations and references are in APA format.
14. The references do not include the DOI; it must be added.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors are thanked for their valuable contribution to the study of writing from a qualitative perspective, as it is an important topic in education, and examining it from a more descriptive standpoint helps identify areas of interest for future interventions. That said, the following brief but precise observations are offered, which may help further enrich the work prior to publication:

1. Overall, the manuscript presents all sections in an organized manner; however, it is recommended to improve the writing style to make it more fluent. Avoid overly long sentences to achieve more concise and clear ideas for the readers. Additionally, consider including transition phrases that effectively connect the ideas between sections.
2. “The three texts in this study were rated within a comprehensive rating procedure of 270 the bigger data sample in Sehlström et al. (2022). The texts were rated by two trained raters, 271 both native speakers of Swedish. To develop a reliable text rating procedure with valid 272 results, a recursive process involving trial ratings, group discussions, and adaptations was 273 carried out."  This parapgraph should be replaced in the procedure section. 
3. In Line 78, there is a grammar error in “and/r”, should be “and/or”. 
4. Some figures and tables (e.g., Figure 3 and Table 1) require more interpretive descriptions within the text; they are presented but not discussed in sufficient depth.
5. Clarify more precisely how the interpretation of qualitative data was conducted, explicitly mentioning the strategies used to safeguard the integrity, reliability, and validity of the information.
6. It is recommended to place greater emphasis on the study’s contribution to existing knowledge, and to add, at the end, a section titled Limitations and Future Directions, where challenges and opportunities in the educational and practical domains related to the research are discussed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf