Children’s Well-Being in the Context of Perceived Inclusion and Digitalization: Evidence from a Survey of Rural Japanese Classrooms
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article presents an interesting and timely study on how children’s perceptions of inclusion in classrooms, along with their use of digital devices, relate to their subjective well-being (SWB) and inquisitiveness in rural Japanese schools. The study aims to (i) examine associations between classroom diversity experiences and children’s SWB, inquisitiveness, and generativity, and (ii) analyze the role of digital device use and adult responsiveness in these relationships.
However, there are several areas where the article could be improved to increase clarity, strengthen the argumentation, and enhance its academic contribution. The following comments are meant to provide constructive feedback to help the author(s) refine the manuscript:
- The aims of the article could be articulated more clearly, especially in the abstract and introduction. While the study’s purpose is stated, the rationale behind why perceived inclusion and digital device use are particularly important for children’s well-being in the Japanese rural context could be elaborated more. What specific gaps in existing research does this study address, and what are its broader implications for international audiences?
- The literature review covers relevant concepts such as inclusion, subjective well-being, and digital device use, but it would benefit from a more integrated and critical discussion of prior research. For example, comparisons to studies in other cultural contexts or with different educational settings would provide a richer framework. This would help situate the findings within a global research landscape on inclusion and child development.
- The methodology is clearly described, including the large sample size and the statistical techniques used (multinomial logistic and median regression models). However, it would be useful to clarify how the five diversity-related categories were operationalized and validated, and to discuss any potential limitations in the survey design or sampling that might affect the generalizability of the results.
- The results are presented with appropriate statistical detail and demonstrate significant associations between perceived inclusion, SWB, inquisitiveness, and generativity. Yet, some parts of the results section could be streamlined to improve readability, avoiding overly technical language where possible without sacrificing precision.
- The discussion section effectively highlights key findings, such as the positive link between inclusion and well-being, as well as the role of adult responsiveness and digital use rules. However, it could be strengthened by deeper interpretation of these relationships. For example, what mechanisms might explain how inclusion fosters inquisitiveness? How might digitalization in classrooms interact with cultural expectations in Japan?
- The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study’s contributions but would be enhanced by more explicit suggestions for educational practice and policy based on the findings. What concrete steps could schools take to foster inclusion and manage digital device use to support children’s well-being?
- There are minor issues with phrasing and structure that could be addressed by careful copy-editing, which would improve clarity and flow.
The article is written in functional English that allows for understanding most of the ideas and results presented. However, there are several areas where the use of language could be improved to achieve a more academic and fluent level. In particular, there are some grammatical errors, subject-verb agreement issues, and expressions that are not entirely natural in an academic context. It would also be beneficial to revise the structure of some sentences to achieve greater clarity and precision in presenting ideas.
For example, on several occasions, verbal constructions are used that could be simplified to sound more natural (e.g., changing “aims at exploring” to “aims to explore”). In addition, there are some agreement errors, such as the incorrect use of the plural verb form (“the results suggests” should be “the results suggest”). It is also recommended to improve word choice to avoid ambiguities or inaccuracies—for example, replacing “tend to report” with more formal expressions such as “are more likely to report.”
Finally, although the text is understandable, some sections could benefit from review by a native speaker or an expert in academic English writing to polish the style, improve cohesion, and avoid unnecessary repetition, thereby ensuring a more professional and clear presentation.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe issue raised is relevant in educational contexts, especially in rural areas, where digital divides are more pronounced. Additionally, understanding the perception of well-being among children in rural schools in Japan is in itself a phenomenon that merits study, especially when analyzing the effect of variables such as inclusion and digital learning on this perception of well-being, which has been little analyzed given recent advances in the use of artificial intelligence and changes in the adoption of technology in the classroom, making this a novel and original study.
Its contribution in this regard is related to the analysis of rural populations, the assessment of children's perception of well-being, and the incorporation of explanatory variables that are not usually considered in traditional studies and models that attempt to explain well-being. Additionally, the quantitative approach and modeling through econometric estimates allow for a more robust descriptive analysis.
Although the research addresses relevant issues in teaching-learning processes, greater precision is required in the abstract to clearly identify the purpose of the study.
Likewise, it does not delve into models that can explain the causal relationship between the variables studied; it is simply a description of research in the area, without identifying the gap that this research seeks to address and how it differs from other studies.
From a methodological point of view, the effort to identify causality rather than simply developing a descriptive or correlational analysis is recognized. Therefore, Table 1 on the correlations between variables is not relevant.
Despite this, it is suggested that the dependent variables of subjective well-being, generosity, and curiosity be explained, as well as how they are measured, in terms of how they are composed of a set of approaches and/or dimensions on a Likert scale, although Table 2 seems to indicate that they are obtained as the sum of these approaches.
With regard to the discussion of results, although they are divided into specific aspects related to the results and more general aspects, it would be worthwhile to compare them with the results of similar research in rural contexts and to incorporate aspects related to educational policies or affirmative action into the conclusion.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper examined the associations between classroom diversity experiences, digital device use, and subjective well-being in Japanese elementary and junior high school students.
The Introduction describes the literature related to and the rationale for the various constructs examined in the paper. While the manuscript is written in a clear and well-structured manner, it would be beneficial to clarify further on the key focus of the paper and the rationale for examining the various and multiple constructs introduced.
The methods of the study employed to answer the research questions, including the study design, measures, analysis and results were clearly described and presented.
On Page 9 Ln 339, should the heading “Multinomial Logit Model” be placed earlier, preceding the prior paragraph describing the use of the MNL model?
On Pg 20, Ln 597-600 “To address these questions, we conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire survey with 2, 158 Japanese elementary and junior high school students, drawing on established frameworks to examine how diversity experiences, psychological traits, digital engagement, and interpersonal factors relate to child development.”: This summary differs slightly from the parameters examined in the study, as set out in the Introduction. In particular, the term “child development” is different from the original examination of “subjective well-being”. A clearer and more consistent usage of terminology in defining the focus of the study is needed.
This study’s findings and directions for future research directions make a valuable contribution to knowledge for education practices and policies, and is relevant within classroom contexts that are increasingly diverse and digitalised.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
Thank you for your careful and thorough revision of the manuscript. You have addressed all the suggestions provided, and the quality of the paper has improved substantially as a result.
