Enhancing Learning Beyond Correction: AI-Assisted Japanese Business Writing and Sociocultural Awareness in Online Higher Education

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript addresses a relevant topic, as examining the effectiveness of AI-based feedback in contexts where when cultural aspects are involved may be necessary in the field of language learning. The literature review is well grounded, the methodology is sound, and the results are discussed appropriately. Nonetheless, it would benefit from some minor adjustments, particularly regarding subsection titles, typographical errors and adherence to referencing guidelines.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper presents a well-designed mixed-methods study with a clear focus, strong theoretical grounding, and a meaningful contribution to research on AI-assisted feedback in language education, particularly within Japanese business writing and sociocultural learning. To further strengthen the paper, the author/s may consider reducing repetition in the Introduction and Discussion sections and tightening some longer passages to improve concision and flow. Minor language editing would also improve the paper's clarity and readability. Overall, in my opinion the study is solid and ready to be published, with revisions largely at the level of style and refinement rather than content-wise.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The overall level of English is solid and fully intelligible, with appropriate academic register and terminology. However, there are some recurring minor issues, such as occasional repetition (notably the Introduction and parts of the Discussion), minor grammatical slips, inconsistent hyphenation, and some long or dense sentences that could be streamlined for clarity. Although these do not undermine the scholarly value of the paper, revision would improve precision and flow, and make it more reader-friendly.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I believe the paper is of practical value, as it provides readers, especially higher education language teachers, with newer and broader insights into the impact of ChatGPT-based automated feedback on Japanese business writing education for adult learners at a cyber university. The paper already exhibits a high level of scholarship; however, the following aspects and sections require revision to improve the paper’s overall readability:

1. In the Abstract section, the researcher(s) may clarify the objective statement by outlining the specific objective that the study intends to address, as it has been observed that two objectives are reflected separately in the second and third sentences. In addition, the stated objective may include sociocultural awareness, rather than focusing solely on ascertaining the potential impact of ChatGPT-based automated feedback on students’ writing education;
2. In the Introduction section, the researcher(s) may omit the fifth paragraph, as it largely repeats the content of the preceding fourth paragraph. If possible, the final paragraph should state only the main objective of the study and should no longer include the procedures or steps undertaken among the participants to gather the required data;
3. In the Literature Review section, the researcher(s) may consider adding an underlying theory or framework that firmly supports the use of ChatGPT or other technology-enabled tools that facilitate the provision of automated feedback on students’ writing skills. Furthermore, they may include a discussion of sociocultural awareness to enhance readers’ understanding of this concept, as it is also a focus of the study;
4. In the Methods section, the researcher(s) may improve clarity by explicitly indicating standard methodological subsections (e.g., Research Design, Participants, Setting, Instruments, and Data Analysis), rather than organizing the section using topical headings such as “Business Japanese Education from a Cultural Education Perspective.” They may also append the research questions instead of presenting them within this section. Moreover, adding a subsection titled Ethical Considerations is recommended, detailing the procedures undertaken to ensure strict compliance with ethical standards;
5. Instead of presenting the Findings and Discussion as separate sections, the researcher(s) may combine them into a single section, as these sections appear to complement each other. In addition, they may use a consistent coding format to refer to participants (e.g., P1, P2, P3) rather than using only letters (A, B, C) as labels, and include the specific line numbers from which the responses were extracted;
6. In the Conclusion section, the researcher(s) may include the practical implications of the study’s salient findings, in addition to discussing the study’s limitations;
7. In the References section, the researcher(s) must follow the referencing format prescribed by the journal. They should also ensure consistency between the authors and sources cited in the main text and the corresponding entries in the reference list. Where available, online links to sources may be provided. Proper citation practices should also be reviewed in the main text, for example, in the Literature Review section, citations such as Yildiz & Kuru (2024) should be checked to ensure correct usage of symbols (e.g., ampersands versus the word and), depending on the required style guide. Furthermore, the inclusion of more recent sources (preferably within the past 5–10 years) is recommended to enhance the paper’s currency; and
8. The paper contains several issues related to grammar, formatting, spacing, and overall presentation, which may affect readability. It is therefore recommended that the researcher(s) thoroughly proofread the manuscript to address these inconsistencies.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf