Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue

Article Menu

Share Help Cite Discuss in SciProfiles

Open AccessArticle

Peer-Review Record

Self-Concept and Self-Esteem, Determinants of Greater Life Satisfaction in Mountain and Climbing Technicians and Athletes

Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2023, 13(7), 1188-1201; https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13070088

by Laura Martín-Talavera¹

, Óscar Gavín-Chocano²

, Guillermo Sanz-Junoy¹ and David Molero^2,*

Reviewer 1:

Tamás Berki

Reviewer 2:

David Manzano-Sánchez

Reviewer 3: Anonymous

Reviewer 4: Anonymous

Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2023, 13(7), 1188-1201; https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13070088

Submission received: 31 May 2023 / Revised: 23 June 2023 / Accepted: 28 June 2023 / Published: 30 June 2023

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Physical Education, Physical Activity and Human Health)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript entitled "Self-concept and Self-esteem, Determinants of Greater Life Satisfaction in Mountain and Climbing Technicians and Athletes" has an important topic, but the manuscript need an extensive revision.

I have detailed comments to the Authors:

Introduction

· The introduction is too wide. I recommend narrowing down for 4-5 paragraph, since the introduction should be compact and in line with the study purpose.

· I recommend deleting subsections and make one big introduction where you explain the concept of self-esteem and self-concept.

· If it possible add more studies about mountain climbers and self-concept and self-esteem.

· The hypotheses figures are well structured, but I suggest narrowing down the text.

Methods

· The methods are well detailed

· Minor issue. Add the answer categories to the measures.

Results

· There are several is with the statistical analysis. I believe there are several analysis that is not necessary in study.

· Is not clear why the Authors use factor analysis since the scales are valid. I only recommend adding a table with the following data: scales - mean, SD, kurtosis, skewness

· The proposed theoretical model is good, but I recommend using path analysis instead of confirmatory factor analysis.

Discussion

· The discussion only reflects the hypotheses, but it would be ideal to put your results into context.

· What was the main conclusion of your study?

· Add a conclusion part. I recommend adding conclusion in several points.

I have detailed comments to the Authors:

Introduction

· The introduction is too wide. I recommend narrowing down for 4-5 paragraph, since the introduction should be compact and in line with the study purpose.

· I recommend deleting subsections and make one big introduction where you explain the concept of self-esteem and self-concept.

· If it possible add more studies about mountain climbers and self-concept and self-esteem.

· The hypotheses figures are well structured, but I suggest narrowing down the text.

Methods

· The methods are well detailed

· Minor issue. Add the answer categories to the measures.

Results

· There are several is with the statistical analysis. I believe there are several analysis that is not necessary in study.

· Is not clear why the Authors use factor analysis since the scales are valid. I only recommend adding a table with the following data: scales - mean, SD, kurtosis, skewness

· The proposed theoretical model is good, but I recommend using path analysis instead of confirmatory factor analysis.

Discussion

· The discussion only reflects the hypotheses, but it would be ideal to put your results into context.

· What was the main conclusion of your study?

· Add a conclusion part. I recommend adding conclusion in several points.

Author Response

Reviewer 1 (Review Report, round 2)

Reviewer 1: Black.

Authors: Red.

Introduction

Reviewer 1: The introduction is too wide. I recommend narrowing down for 4-5 paragraph, since the introduction should be compact and in line with the study purpose. I recommend deleting subsections and make one big introduction where you explain the concept of self-esteem and self-concept.

Authors: We appreciate the feedback and suggestions received. Changes suggested by reviewer 1 have been made, reducing the introduction and removing subsections.

Reviewer 1: If it possible add more studies about mountain climbers and self-concept and self-esteem.

Authors: Studies on mountain athletes related to self-concept and self-esteem have been added:

Bahaeloo-Horeh, S.; & Assari, S. Students experience self-esteem improvement during mountaineering. Wilderness & environmental medicine 2008, 19(3), 181-185. https://doi.org/10.1580/07-WEME-OR-130.1

MacKenzie, R.; Monaghan, L.; Masson, R. A.; Werner, A. K.; Caprez, T. S.; Johnston, L.; & Kemi, O. J. Physical and Physiological Determinants of Rock Climbing. International journal of sports physiology and performance 2020, 15(2), 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2018-0901

Niedermeier, M.; Kogler, C.; Frühauf, A.; & Kopp, M. Psychological Variables Related to Developmental Changes during Adolescence-A Comparison between Alpine and Non-Alpine Sport Participants. International journal of environmental research and public health 2020, 17(21), 7879. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217879

Reviewer 1: The hypotheses figures are well structured, but I suggest narrowing down the text.

Authors: The text has been revised.

Methods

Reviewer 1: The methods are well detailed. Minor issue. Add the answer categories to the measures.

Authors: Response categories have been added.

Results

Reviewer 1: The hypotheses figures are well structured, but I suggest narrowing down the text.

Authors: The text has been revised.

Reviewer 1: There are several is with the statistical analysis. I believe there are several analysis that is not necessary in study. Is not clear why the Authors use factor analysis since the scales are valid.

Authors: The recommendations have been followed and the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) has been eliminated from the instruments used to facilitate the reading of the article, as it is not necessary, following the recommendations of the reviewers. In relation to the self-concept scale, one of the reasons why the confirmatory factor analysis was carried out was because only 3 self-concept subscales (social, emotional and physical) of the 5 that the instrument has have been used.

Responding to the reviewer, the CFA and its identification and estimation strategies were used, as well as the model fit indices used to assess the goodness of fit. In the CFA, latent variables have been identified by fixing a reference variable, which establishes the frame of reference for the other latent variables. This involves setting one of the regression coefficients of the indicator variables to 1 to establish a scale. The regression coefficients of the other variables are estimated in relation to this reference variable.

Discussion

Reviewer 1: The discussion only reflects the hypotheses, but it would be ideal to put your results into context. What was the main conclusion of your study? Add a conclusion part. I recommend adding conclusion in several points.

Authors: The conclusions have been reviewed, analyzing their importance in the context of the study, analyzing the main conclusion.

Reviewer 2 Report

This is an interesting manuscript about a theoretical model with Mountaineering and climbing athletes.

First I consider a high strength of this study the high sample you have. However some concerns about the paper should be taking into account;

INTRODUCTION

- I consider a framework about this sport should be included as first paragraph (sport characteristic, definition….).
- There are some long paragraphs without authors, for instance the lines 28 to 37 about licenses Where did you found this information? Or línea 73-78 about self esteem it’s looks that are you the person who write this and not from any author.

- life satisfaction section is well. I consider you should used the same structure with the other sections of the variables (more references, and nowadays references)

- what theoterical framework support your study? Is important to include some theory as base to your study.

- figure 1: you write H3 in life satisfaction but this is about self-esteem

Method section

- Because you have high sample. I consider interesting to include some dates like age groups, years practicing sport… I am not sure if you have this dates or o my gender and age

- Why did you calculate Omega value and Cronbach value and not only one of this?

RESULTS

- what are the indirect effects of your model?

- looking the prediction model some variables predict negatively others like physical self concept-self esteem-life satisfaction. It is right? This is really an interesting result and should be discuss

- Have you checked this model according to gender or age? This is important to ensure it works in all cases.

DISCUSION

- I think that more reports about self-esteem and physical concept should be include to discuss Your results (although there are papers that are agree and disagree with your study).

- another important aspect is that physical self-concept predict positively life satisfaction but negatively if there is the self esteem as mediator between both. How do you explain it?

Finally, I consider important include the questionnaire as anexo or link in the paper and more precision about the way to pass the instruments and date (for instance, since 2018 to 2021) because the high amount of participants.

good luck

Author Response

Reviewer 2 (Review Report, round 2)

Reviewer 2: Black.

Authors: Red.

Reviewer 2:

This is an interesting manuscript about a theoretical model with Mountaineering and climbing athletes.

First, I consider a high strength of this study the high sample you have. However, some concerns about the paper should be taking into account.

Authors:

We appreciate the reviewer's evaluations, and their satisfaction with our article. We agree with the reviewer that one of the strengths of our research is the sample size.

Introduction

Reviewer 2: I consider a framework about this sport should be included as first paragraph (sport characteristic, definition ...).

Authors: A brief description of this sport has been included at the beginning of the introduction.

Reviewer 2: There are some long paragraphs without authors, for instance the lines 28 to 37 about licenses Where did you found this information? Or linea 73-78 about self esteem it’s looks that are you the person who write this and not from any author.

Authors: We have included references to studies that support the ideas raised:

Reviewer 2: Life satisfaction section is well. I consider you should used the same structure with the other sections of the variables (more references, and nowadays references).

Authors: More current references have been included in all sections, as we mentioned before.

Reviewer 2: What theoterical framework support your study? Is important to include some theory as base to your study.

Authors: Information on this issue has been included in the study.

Reviewer 2: figure 1: you write H3 in life satisfaction but this is about self-esteem.

Authors: In the study, both in the introduction and in the method, mention is made of self-esteem, self-concept and satisfaction with life.

Method

Reviewer 2: Because you have high sample. I consider interesting to include some dates like age groups, years practicing sport… I am not sure if you have this dates or o my gender and age.

Authors: The study mentions the characteristics of the sample differentiated by sex and the average age is reported. It is specified that the participants are people over 18 years of age (the age of majority in Spain), with a federation license in 2022. Regarding the distribution by gender, 2,696 subjects were men (67.1%) and 1,322 women (32. 9%). The mean age was 49.42 years (±11.9).

Reviewer 2: Why did you calculate Omega value and Cronbach value and not only one of this?

Authors: It is a current trend in research articles, usually reporting two different ways to calculate reliability.

Lozano et al. (2008) demonstrated that a smaller number of response alternatives, decreasing the commutation of the scale, increasing the alpha coefficient. One of the main advantages of the Cronbach's alpha coefficient is that it only needs one application of the test for its calculation (Schmidt & Ilies, 2003).

On the contrary, McDonald's omega coefficient, unlike Cronbach's alpha coefficient, works with factor loadings, which are the weighted sum of the standardized variables, a transformation that makes the calculations more stable (Timmerman, 2005) and reflects the true confidence level (Ventura-León & Caycho-Rodríguez, 2017).

For these reasons we use both ways to report the reliability of the scores, in the scales used.

Results

Reviewer 2: What are the indirect effects of your model? Looking the prediction model some variables predict negatively others like physical self-concept, self-esteem and life satisfaction. It is right? This is really an interesting result and should be discuss.

Authors: This aspect is discussed, which was expected, since low scores in physical self-concept are related to low satisfaction with life (citations).

The strategies used for identification and estimation, as well as the model fit indices employed to evaluate the goodness of fit, are explained below.

In the CFA, latent variables have been identified by fixing a reference variable, which establishes the frame of reference for the other latent variables. This involves setting one of the regression coefficients of the indicator variables to 1 in order to establish a scale. The regression coefficients of the other variables are estimated in relation to this reference variable.

Additionally, in the SEM, in addition to the identification in the CFA, relationships between the latent variables are established, allowing for modeling of interactions and causal relationships among them. These relationships are based on prior theories or specific hypotheses. Therefore, the CFA is included to verify the value of the research.

Maximum likelihood has been used as the most common method of estimation. This method estimates the parameters of the model that maximize the likelihood of the observed data fitting the expected data according to the model. Partial least squares (PLS) is also employed as an estimation method when assumptions of normality are not met.

Both models use fit indices to evaluate the goodness of fit between the proposed model and the observed data. These include the Goodness of Fit (GoF) chi-square, Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and Incremental Fit Index (IFI), which assess the improvement of the proposed model compared to a null model. Values close to 1 indicate a good fit. The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) is also utilized to estimate the approximation error between the proposed model and the observed data, considering the fit relative to the amount of information in the model. Values close to 0.05 indicate a good fit. In the mediation analysis using PLS-SEM, the relationship between self-concept (physical, emotional, and social) and life satisfaction was examined, with self-esteem acting as the mediating variable. A significant negative relationship was found between life satisfaction and self-esteem, indicating that as self-esteem decreases, life satisfaction also decreases. In terms of mediation, it was identified that self-esteem acts as a mediator in the relationship between self-concept (physical, emotional, and social) and life satisfaction. This means that the influence of self-concept on life satisfaction occurs through self-esteem. Additionally, a reduction in the direct relationship between self-concept and life satisfaction was observed, suggesting that part of the influence of self-concept on life satisfaction is explained by the indirect influence through self-esteem.

Reviewer 2: Have you checked this model according to gender or age? This is important to ensure it works in all cases.

Authors: In other recently published articles, we have addressed these issues, such as in Gavín-Chocano et al. (2023), we include this suggestion:

Gavin-Chocano, O.; Martin-Talavera, L.; Sanz-Junoy, G.; Molero, D. Emotional Intelligence and Resilience: Predictors of Life Satisfaction among Mountain Trainers. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4991. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15064991

Discussion

10.

Reviewer 2: I think that more reports about self-esteem and physical concept should be include to discuss Your results (although there are papers that are agree and disagree with your study).

Authors: We have included references to studies that support the ideas raised:

11.

Reviewer 2: Another important aspect is that physical self-concept predict positively life satisfaction but negatively if there is the self-esteem as mediator between both. How do you explain it?

Authors: These findings support Hypothesis 4 and uphold the idea that self-esteem plays a crucial role in the relationship between self-concept and life satisfaction. By improving self-esteem, it is possible to enhance life satisfaction, even if self-concept in certain domains is not very positive. This suggests that working on improving self-esteem can be an effective strategy to promote greater life satisfaction in individuals with less favorable self-concepts. It is important to note that these results are based on the analysis conducted using PLS-SEM and may vary depending on the specific sample and context.

12.

Reviewer 2: Finally, I consider important include the questionnaire as anexo or link in the paper and more precision about the way to pass the instruments and date (for instance, since 2018 to 2021) because the high amount of participants.

Authors: We appreciate the suggestions.

Details of the time when the information was collected have been included in the procedure section (months of data collection).

The instruments used are validated by their authors, being internationally prestigious scales, which can be found in the article references.

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for allowing me to review this interesting study. Overall, the study has raised a very interesting point of discussion. I believe this study has provided novel findings in this area, allowing readers to think more deeply about what is happening.

First of all, I would like to share the need to carry out works like the one you present. They are necessary for the advancement of science in the field they study. The objective of the manuscript is clear and consistent. The study has been an interesting reading, it is necessary to know the reality of the sector on which the work emphasizes.

The abstract includes the necessary elements: background with purpose (objective) of the study, methods, results, main conclusions without exaggerating them.

In the introduction, sufficient ordered references of the publications considered key, with significant and sufficient evidence, are indicated. I find the review of the literature really interesting.

Likewise, reasons are highlighted that justify the importance in a broad context and the current state of the subject investigated. The study is clearly defined and indicates the intention and meaning of the work. The objective to be tested in the study is recorded. The text is understandable and makes clear the main objective of the work and the main conclusions.

In relation to the material and methods, say that the study is described in detail. In addition to the methods, the intervention requirements are indicated in sufficient detail.

Overall, it is a very interesting manuscript, despite some suggested questions to improve the manuscript and study findings. It is recommended to include the limitations more specifically, the difficulties that the authors have detected. If you consider that your findings can be extrapolated to other countries, among other issues, and I would like to know if you believe that the sport discipline to which you belong and the level at which you practice the sport can show significant differences depending on the results obtained

Author Response

Reviewer 3 (Review Report, round 2)

Response to Reviewer 3

We appreciate all the suggestions received.
The limitations and difficulties of the study have been included in detail.
Within the future lines of action, it will be necessary to compare the results obtained with those of other countries to establish whether there are significant differences in the results.
Likewise, they have been included as a proposal for improvement of the article, that in the next works it will be necessary to know if there are significant differences depending on the different disciplines of this sport, following the indications of this reviewer.

Reviewer Suggestions 3

The abstract includes the necessary elements: background with purpose (objective) of the study, methods, results, main conclusions without exaggerating them.

In the introduction, sufficient ordered references of the publications considered key, with significant and sufficient evidence, are indicated. I find the review of the literature really interesting. Likewise, reasons are highlighted that justify the importance in a broad context and the current state of the subject investigated. The study is clearly defined and indicates the intention and meaning of the work. The objective to be tested in the study is recorded. The text is understandable and makes clear the main objective of the work and the main conclusions. In relation to the material and methods, say that the study is described in detail. In addition to the methods, the intervention requirements are indicated in sufficient detail.

Reviewer 4 Report

Introduction

While the study examines the relationship between physical self-concept, self-esteem, and various aspects of mountaineering and climbing athletes, it appears that the current findings may not significantly contribute to the existing literature. I would like to suggest revising the objective of your study to ensure that it provides meaningful and important insights for both research and practice in the field.

Specifically, I recommend that you reconsider the focus of your study and clearly articulate how your research addresses a gap in the current knowledge. It would be helpful to highlight the specific implications and practical applications that your findings could have for mountaineering and climbing athletes, coaches, and practitioners. By emphasizing the unique contributions of your study, you can enhance its value and relevance to the field.

Method

The authors have provided a detailed description of the measurement scales used in their study, including the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Questionnaire, Self-concept scale AF5, and Life satisfaction scale (SWLS). However, it would be helpful if the authors could elaborate on how they handled the latent variables in the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) models. Specifically, it is important to provide information on the identification and estimation strategies employed, as well as the model fit indices used to evaluate the goodness of fit.

After reviewing the statistical analysis subheading, I have a few comments that need to be addressed. Firstly, you mentioned that you were unable to provide a response to H4 due to AMOS not conducting mediation analyses. Please clarify how you plan to address this issue and whether you will consider alternative methods for conducting the mediation analysis.

Secondly, in your manuscript, you discussed the use of both Omega coefficient and Cronbach's alpha for analyzing reliability. It is generally recommended to use either one of these measures, as they serve a similar purpose. Please justify your decision to include both measures and consider removing one of them to avoid redundancy.

Lastly, in the results section, you reported AVE and composite reliability scores, but these measures are not described in the statistical subheading. Please provide a clear explanation of AVE and composite reliability and their relevance to your study in the appropriate section.

The authors have employed an extensive array of statistical tests in their study, including confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the questionnaires, Fornell-Larcker criterion, and Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT). While it is commendable to explore various statistical techniques, it appears that some of these tests may not directly contribute to the study's objective. Consequently, it would be beneficial if the authors could justify the inclusion of these specific tests and explain how they enhance the understanding of the research question. Additionally, it is essential to report these statistical tests in the appropriate section of the manuscript, as their absence from the statistical subheading makes it challenging for readers to locate and interpret the results effectively. Organizing and clearly presenting the statistical analyses will greatly improve the readability and comprehensibility of the manuscript.

Results

In order to streamline the presentation of results and ensure clarity in the main manuscript, it is recommended that the authors consider moving some of the extensive statistical tests, such as confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the questionnaires, Fornell-Larcker criterion, and Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT), to the supplementary material. While these tests may provide valuable insights, including them in the main text may overwhelm readers and distract from the core findings. By focusing on reporting the essential results in the main manuscript and providing detailed information on the additional statistical analyses in the supplementary material, the authors can strike a balance between providing comprehensive information and maintaining the readability of the main text. This approach will enable readers to grasp the key outcomes and facilitate a more efficient understanding of the study's findings.

Discussion

I have carefully reviewed your manuscript and would like to provide feedback on the discussion section. While the overall structure and content of the discussion are appropriate, I noticed that it predominantly reiterates the results section without delving into a thorough analysis of the practical implications of your findings.

A discussion section should go beyond restating the results and aim to provide a deeper understanding of the implications and significance of the findings in the context of the research field. It is crucial to highlight the practical relevance of your study and discuss how the results contribute to the existing knowledge base or address gaps in the literature. This could involve comparing your findings with previous studies, discussing potential mechanisms or explanations for the observed outcomes, and considering the broader implications for practitioners or policymakers.

I recommend focusing on the practical implications of your results and engaging in a comprehensive analysis of the potential applications and significance of your findings. Providing a clear interpretation of the results and discussing their implications will enhance the value and impact of your research.

Conclusion

I noticed that there is a lack of a distinct conclusion section and a limitation section with clear subheadings or titles. To improve the clarity and organization of your manuscript, I recommend incorporating separate sections for both the conclusion and limitation. Use clear subheadings or titles for each section to guide the reader and facilitate easy navigation through the article. This will enhance the overall structure of your manuscript and provide a more comprehensive framework for discussing the conclusions and limitations of your study.

needs revisions.

Author Response

Reviewer 4 (Review Report, round 2)

Reviewer 4: Black.

Authors: Red.

Introduction

Reviewer 4: While the study examines the relationship between physical self-concept, self-esteem, and various aspects of mountaineering and climbing athletes, it appears that the current findings may not significantly contribute to the existing literature. I would like to suggest revising the objective of your study to ensure that it provides meaningful and important insights for both research and practice in the field.

Authors: We appreciate the reviewer's suggestions and have revised the objective, particularly addressing the practical implications of this study for athletes.

Method

Reviewer 4: The authors have provided a detailed description of the measurement scales used in their study, including the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Questionnaire, Self-concept scale AF5, and Life satisfaction scale (SWLS). However, it would be helpful if the authors could elaborate on how they handled the latent variables in the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) models. Specifically, it is important to provide information on the identification and estimation strategies employed, as well as the model fit indices used to evaluate the goodness of fit.

Authors: The strategies used for identification and estimation, as well as the model fit indices employed to evaluate the goodness of fit, are explained below.

Following the recommendations of other reviewers, we have eliminated the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) from the 3 instruments used, to simplify the presentation of the results. Since the scales are validated and recognized by the scientific community.

Reviewer 4: After reviewing the statistical analysis subheading, I have a few comments that need to be addressed. Firstly, you mentioned that you were unable to provide a response to H4 due to AMOS not conducting mediation analyses. Please clarify how you plan to address this issue and whether you will consider alternative methods for conducting the mediation analysis.

Authors: In the mediation analysis using PLS-SEM, the relationship between self-concept (physical, emotional, and social) and life satisfaction was examined, with self-esteem acting as the mediating variable. A significant negative relationship was found between life satisfaction and self-esteem, indicating that as self-esteem decreases, life satisfaction also decreases. In terms of mediation, it was identified that self-esteem acts as a mediator in the relationship between self-concept (physical, emotional, and social) and life satisfaction. This means that the influence of self-concept on life satisfaction occurs through self-esteem. Additionally, a reduction in the direct relationship between self-concept and life satisfaction was observed, suggesting that part of the influence of self-concept on life satisfaction is explained by the indirect influence through self-esteem.

These findings support Hypothesis 4 and uphold the idea that self-esteem plays a crucial role in the relationship between self-concept and life satisfaction. By improving self-esteem, it is possible to enhance life satisfaction, even if self-concept in certain domains is not very positive. This suggests that working on improving self-esteem can be an effective strategy to promote greater life satisfaction in individuals with less favorable self-concepts. It is important to note that these results are based on the analysis conducted using PLS-SEM and may vary depending on the specific sample and context.

Reviewer 4: Secondly, in your manuscript, you discussed the use of both Omega coefficient and Cronbach's alpha for analyzing reliability. It is generally recommended to use either one of these measures, as they serve a similar purpose. Please justify your decision to include both measures and consider removing one of them to avoid redundancy.

Authors: It is a current trend in research articles, usually reporting two different ways to calculate reliability.

For these reasons we use both ways to report the reliability of the scores, in the scales used.

Reviewer 4: Lastly, in the results section, you reported AVE and composite reliability scores, but these measures are not described in the statistical subheading. Please provide a clear explanation of AVE and composite reliability and their relevance to your study in the appropriate section. The authors have employed an extensive array of statistical tests in their study, including confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the questionnaires, Fornell-Larcker criterion, and Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT). While it is commendable to explore various statistical techniques, it appears that some of these tests may not directly contribute to the study's objective. Consequently, it would be beneficial if the authors could justify the inclusion of these specific tests and explain how they enhance the understanding of the research question. Additionally, it is essential to report these statistical tests in the appropriate section of the manuscript, as their absence from the statistical subheading makes it challenging for readers to locate and interpret the results effectively. Organizing and clearly presenting the statistical analyses will greatly improve the readability and comprehensibility of the manuscript.

Authors:

We appreciate all suggestions.

As mentioned, we have chosen to eliminate the confirmatory factor analyzes performed on the three instruments used from the presentation of the results, since, as the reviewer tells us, these tests and these results may not contribute to the objective of the study.

The information of the statistical tests has been detailed in the corresponding section of the manuscript.

Results

Reviewer 4: In order to streamline the presentation of results and ensure clarity in the main manuscript, it is recommended that the authors consider moving some of the extensive statistical tests, such as confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the questionnaires, Fornell-Larcker criterion, and Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT), to the supplementary material. While these tests may provide valuable insights, including them in the main text may overwhelm readers and distract from the core findings. By focusing on reporting the essential results in the main manuscript and providing detailed information on the additional statistical analyses in the supplementary material, the authors can strike a balance between providing comprehensive information and maintaining the readability of the main text. This approach will enable readers to grasp the key outcomes and facilitate a more efficient understanding of the study's findings.

Authors:

We appreciate the suggestions.

As previously mentioned, and having received the suggestion that confirmatory factor analysis is not necessary, from 2 of the 4 reviewers who have evaluated the work, we have proceeded to eliminate it, as it could distract readers from the article of the main findings.

Discussion

Reviewer 4: I have carefully reviewed your manuscript and would like to provide feedback on the discussion section. While the overall structure and content of the discussion are appropriate, I noticed that it predominantly reiterates the results section without delving into a thorough analysis of the practical implications of your findings. A discussion section should go beyond restating the results and aim to provide a deeper understanding of the implications and significance of the findings in the context of the research field. It is crucial to highlight the practical relevance of your study and discuss how the results contribute to the existing knowledge base or address gaps in the literature. This could involve comparing your findings with previous studies, discussing potential mechanisms or explanations for the observed outcomes, and considering the broader implications for practitioners or policymakers.

Authors: We appreciate the suggestions.

The discussion section has been revised, to go beyond reaffirming the results, and has sought to provide a deeper understanding of the practical implications, while providing evidence and references that support the ideas raised, providing evidence from more studies:

Reviewer 4: I recommend focusing on the practical implications of your results and engaging in a comprehensive analysis of the potential applications and significance of your findings. Providing a clear interpretation of the results and discussing their implications will enhance the value and impact of your research.

Authors: We have included and discussed the practical implications of their study results to analyze the impact of the research.

Conclusion

Reviewer 4: I noticed that there is a lack of a distinct conclusion section and a limitation section with clear subheadings or titles. To improve the clarity and organization of your manuscript, I recommend incorporating separate sections for both the conclusion and limitation. Use clear subheadings or titles for each section to guide the reader and facilitate easy navigation through the article. This will enhance the overall structure of your manuscript and provide a more comprehensive framework for discussing the conclusions and limitations of your study.

Authors: We appreciate all the suggestions received. The limitations and difficulties of the study have been included in detail.

Within the future lines of action, it will be necessary to compare the results obtained with those of other countries to establish whether there are significant differences in the results.

Likewise, they have been included as a proposal for improvement of the article, that in the next works it will be necessary to know if there are significant differences depending on the different disciplines of this sport, following the indications of this reviewer.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the Author's contribution to this study. The manuscript has been improved.

Minor editing of English language required

Reviewer 2 Report

Congratulations

Article Menu

Self-Concept and Self-Esteem, Determinants of Greater Life Satisfaction in Mountain and Climbing Technicians and Athletes

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI