Ethnic Identity Development, Post-Traumatic Stress Symptoms, and Relationships with Primary Caregivers: A Two-Wave Longitudinal Study among Yi Ethnic Minority Youths in Rural China School Settings
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper deals with an original and innovative theme and for this reason I think it deserves to be published in the Journal.
However, I believe some corrections need to be made prior to publication.
First, the introduction is too long. Thus, this part of the paper should be summarized, focusing more on the theoretical framework underlying the study.
In addition, in the introduction the authors anticipates some research findings. The authors must remove those information from the introduction.
In line with this, the description of the sample deserves a separate paragraph (it should therefore be removed from the introductory part and from the beginning of the study paragraph).
The methodology is clearly explained, as are the research results.
However, data analysis should be included in the literature on the topic.
Authors should specify whether their study differs from or is in line with other studies on the subject (perhaps conducted in other territorial contexts) and above all why.
Finally, I believe that the authors should expand the section devoted to the practical implications of their research. They should strive to think about how the local government can use research data to improve the well-being of adolescents belonging to the Yi ethnic minority and which kind of collaboration with schools and other caregivers could be possible.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your comments. Please see attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Let me generally say that this work about exploring the Ethnic Identity progress while difficult parental situations are occurring in ethnical minorities is extremely interesting and timely. I found the whole research well-thought out, well-conducted and even the recruitment criteria associated to the difficulties in building up such two-waves measures seem robust. The data analyses with multilevel models are appropriated and well performed. The key results are well organized with yielding to useful implications. However, and unfortunately, after all these good words a serious doubt about this work remains and it can be summarized in two single words: too specific. I mean that, although I understand that the intention and thus the focus of the authors was about the Yi ethnical group, all the interest for this work is delimited to China territory. My view is that, even though the authors wanted to explore a specific reality in their country, they should have enlarged the ethnical identity at post-traumatic situations to other international minorities, at least a bit more, and consider Yi people as a case study. On the contrary, if you talk about only just of Yi minority, and thus of all rural, regional, and so forth problems and features concerning this ethnical group the result is that your paper is of interest only just for Chinese people. So then, maybe it would have been wiser to submit this work to a Chinese specific journal rather than an international outlet like Adolescents.
Frankly speaking, I do not know what I can suggest to the Adolescents editors about this manuscript, that it is well-built up, doubtlessly. I will try and feel to suggest the authors in looking for other international studies about the ethical identity development under stress situations and relations with caregivers and therefore make some comparison or similarity. I’m suggesting that in order to furnish some interest also for other countries readers. For example, the authors made some reference in the text within lines 146-147, to Black and Latinos adolescents in the US, so why the authors did not continue in this way with proposing other minorities realities that are not Chinese? I do suggest enriching the Introduction and the subheading 1.1 with other international studies about ethnical identity developments in minorities groups while stressing by difficult situations like post-traumatic stresses. And after that, discussing their results with the ones of other similar foreign minorities.
Granted that, I found also two minor remarks to address:
- In the sub-heading 1.5 the authors referred to hypotheses when proposed their conceptual model. But I could not find these hypotheses in the results section anymore. I got that they have been verified within the models, but I do suggest preserving a coherence in the paper: if hypotheses are postulated and numbered, they should be reported with the same numeration also in the results.
- In the sub-heading section 2.3.1. Multi-ethnic Group Measurement, scales are mentioned with having total scores, but these total scores were not reported so as to know the levels of ethnic identities and the post-traumatic symptoms in the sample. They should be provided. The same for all the other measurement scales.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your comments. Please see attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
- Very interesting article to consider the connection between ethnic identification, attachment, and trauma.
- Make sure capitalization of all titles should be similar - for example line 45 should be "Ethnic Minority Adolescents in Rural China: The Case of Yi"
- In the introduction, there are lots of lists of categories of attachment. I would suggest to shorten to the primary theory that you are using to conceptualize.
- this paper needs proofreading - for example line 251 - "primary caregiver relationships with primary caregivers"
- selection of a full classroom to complete a survey is not the best randomized way for measures.
- PTSD rates are extremely high - why? is survey not right for this group? was there a mass trauma? this is essential to conceptualize
Author Response
Thank you very much for your comments. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Let me say that the authors did a great job with their revision. They worked hard and improved the manuscript substantially well. I am very glad they accepted my main suggestion to focalize the paper on more international realities so as to enhance the interest of a wide audience and thus yielding to important implications that can be applied to global minorities and not limited to Yi people.
I have only just one more concern about the measurement scales total scores I asked to insert in my previous review. Generally, the authors inserted the total potential scores for single respondent, but I did intend the total scores found in the whole sample. For making you an example: in the ethnical identity exploration component where you have 5-items measured by 4-likert scales ranged from 1 to 4, ok that you can have a range from 5 to 20 for a single respondent, but it is interesting to know the total score (or an average score of them) obtained by the whole sample in order to get the LEVEL, or the average level, of ethnical indentity exploration in the collected sample. The same story for all the other measurement scales. In my view, these scores are necessary to provide a picture of the levels of these measures within the entire sample.
Pay attention to the post-traumatic stress 8-item scale, the authors reported it was measured with a 4-point Likert scale (None = 0, Rarely = 1, Sometimes = 3, and A lot = 5) with potential scores for single respondent from 0 to 32. So then, I do suppose that the label "A lot is equal to 4 and not to 5. Please correct this.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you for addressing my comments, fantastic article.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
