Sense of Belonging in a Time of Crisis: Mapping Out the Lived Cross-Cultural Experiences of International Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In detail, I read and analyzed the manuscript “Sense of Belonging: Mapping out the Lived Cross-Cultural Experiences of International Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic” The topic is up-to-date because of the vulnerable group of international students (who in this study are from numerous countries worldwide). Please accept these constructive criticisms to enhance the quality of your work. Thank you.

 

Introduction

Materials and Methods

The method of respondents' information and the time required to complete the questionnaire are adequately described in the methodology.

However:

• I wonder why the authors didn’t mention anything about the questionnaire/instrument. The author should mention “8 pre-written 105 questions” as a supplementary file.
• How were the topics selected for the single interviews? Was this a validated questionnaire?
• I wonder why the authors didn’t mention any focus group interviews. If so, the authors should highlight it under the data collection heading. As a mixed approach, focus group findings are good at adding robustness/justification to the results and conclusion.

Results.

• Results are presented very well.

Discussion

• It will be good if authors highlight the “strengths and limitations” of the study at the end of the discussion.

• Lines 25-32 This paragraph needs to be strengthened. The authors should seriously consider referencing this information, as this full paragraph lacks references.
• Lines 71-80: It remains unclear how the authors determined the sample size. Does the number 105 justify a total enrollment of “5203 (2022) (ISS, 2022)” of all students? How responsive is it?
• Line 412-414. This statement lacks references. I suggest the authors pin it with a relevant reference, as this study, https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12090941, highlighted the similar concern.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The relevance of this study lies in its ability to address a critical gap in understanding how international students navigate their sense of belonging during a global crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. By exploring their lived cross-cultural experiences, this research sheds light on the unique challenges these students face, including isolation, cultural adaptation, and resilience. These insights are vital for institutions aiming to create inclusive environments and enhance support systems tailored to the needs of international students. Additionally, the findings contribute to broader discussions on equity, mental health, and cultural integration, offering valuable implications for policymakers, educators, and public health professionals. This study not only enriches academic literature but also provides practical recommendations for fostering belonging and well-being in diverse educational settings, especially during periods of heightened uncertainty and change.

My Comments:

 

Abstract section

The authors should ensure the abstract begins with a compelling sentence that underscores the significance of the study, particularly its focus on the unique challenges faced by international students during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Authors should succinctly summarize the research objectives and methodology, emphasizing the mixed-method approach with quantitative data collected via Qualtrics and qualitative insights obtained through interviews or focus groups. The authors should highlight the key findings, focusing on themes such as cultural adaptation, isolation, and resilience. Finally, they should conclude the abstract by outlining the practical and theoretical contributions of the study, including implications for institutional policies and support systems designed to foster inclusivity during global crises.

 

Introduction section

The Authors should strengthen the introductory framework by clearly establishing the dual impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and cross-cultural dynamics on international students. The Authors should also highlight specific challenges, such as isolation, cultural adaptation, or academic pressures, to provide a vivid and relatable context. For example, mention the specific challenges faced by the students who are USA nationals, so that you can draw a comparative inference from that. [Line 24 – Line 61].

 

The authors should clarify the significance of the research by explaining the rationale for exploring the ‘sense of belonging’ in this unique demographic during the pandemic. They should also link this to broader themes in public health, mental well-being, or sociological studies to emphasize the study's relevance and novelty. [Line 24—Line 61].

 

The Authors should streamline the narrative flow of this study. They should aim for a seamless progression from the broader global context of the pandemic to the narrower focus on international students' experiences. This could involve reordering the paragraphs for logical coherence or using transition phrases to guide readers through the argument or gaps in this study. [Line 24 – Line 61].

 

Methods section

 

Study setting:

The Authors should provide a vivid description of the geographical, institutional, and cultural context where the study was conducted. They should specify whether the research took place in a particular country, university, or type of academic environment, and highlight its relevance to the experiences of the international students who participated in the study. Also, the Authors should explore how the socio-cultural and academic environment shaped the 'sense of belonging' among the sampled participants who participated in this study. For instance, factors like language, campus diversity, or community support systems that the Authors may have perceived to have influenced cross-cultural experiences, and this information should be included in this section. The Authors should connect the study setting to the research objectives, and connect the study setting to the main objective of mapping lived experiences. This might involve explaining why this specific setting was chosen and how it provided a meaningful platform for examining the challenges and supports international students faced during the COVID-19 pandemic. [Line 70 – Line 80]

 

Clarifications

In Line 78 – Line 80, the Authors state that the top 6 countries and regions where 78 students come from were India, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Columbia, and Nigeria (ISS, 79 2022). This is composed of International students. But in Line 82 – Line 84, you stated that 73.53% of participants 82 were Asian. Can the Authors clarify this? Who are the Non-Asian and Asians, conceptual clarification of this is key. [Line 78 – Line 84].

 

Quantitative data collection

The Authors should clarify the quantitative data collection process by elaborating on the specific steps taken within the Qualtrics platform. This could include the design of the survey (e.g., question structure etc.), distribution method (e.g., email, university networks), and the quality control measures they employed to ensure reliable responses from the participants who participated in the Qualtrics survey. The Authors should kindly highlight why Qualtrics was chosen for the quantitative data collection, by emphasizing its advantages in cross-cultural research contexts. [Line 117 – Line 129].

 

Qualitative data collection

Furthermore, the Authors should detail the qualitative data collection approach by providing a clear and comprehensive breakdown of how qualitative data was gathered. The Authors should mention whether it was any of these interview methods such as key informants, in-depth interviews, focus groups, or open-ended survey questions that were used in this study. The Authors should describe the format of how the participants were recruited, and how trust-building was facilitated to encourage authentic responses. Notwithstanding, the Authors should lay more detailed emphasis on rigorous documentation to ensure each step in the qualitative process. The Authors ought to specify the interview types, transcription process, and thematic coding methods used to analyze the qualitative data. They should cite tools or techniques applied that would enhance transparency and replicability. [Line 130 – Line 159]

 

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Insert the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the quantitative and qualitative data collection. This is very important.

 

Inclusion criteria

The Authors should define the inclusion criteria, for the quantitative data, and they should outline the criteria such as international students enrolled during the pandemic, accessible through university databases, and willing to participate in the survey. Regarding the qualitative data, respondents who experienced cross-cultural challenges, who were impacted by COVID-19 restrictions, and who expressed interest in sharing detailed lived experiences through interviews should be included. [Line 87 – Line 93].

Exclusion criteria

The Authors should specify exclusion criteria that exclude participants who were domestic students, those unable to provide informed consent, or individuals whose circumstances or contexts did not align with the study’s focus ( that is, students unaffected by cross-cultural factors during the pandemic). To enhance clarity and justification, the Authors should provide a clear rationale for why these criteria were chosen, connecting them back to the study’s aim of mapping lived cross-cultural experiences and ensuring the research remains focused and relevant to the audience. [Line 87 – Line 93].

 

The analysis conducted on the quantitative data was done. The approach and the type of analysis process should be mentioned in the method section. [Line 130 – Line 159].

 Quantitative data

The Authors should specify the analysis process or approach, by clearly describing the statistical methods or tools used to analyze the quantitative data (such as regression analysis, chi-square tests, chi-square tests, or descriptive statistics). The Authors should include the details of the software they employed such as SPSS, R, or Qualtrics’ built-in analytics, if applicable, to demonstrate the methodological rigour of this study. The Authors should describe the analysis process by outlining the step-by-step procedure for processing and analysing the data. For instance, the Authors should mention how data cleaning was conducted, how variables were defined, and how specific tests were applied to address the research questions provided in the introduction section of this manuscript. The Authors should provide the link of the analytical approach to the research aims, by providing a clear explanation of how the chosen analytical methods align with the study objectives. For instance, the Authors should detail how the analysis has helped to explore patterns or relationships related to the sense of belonging among international students during the COVID-19 pandemic. [Line 117 – Line 129].

 

Qualitative data

The Authors should clearly define the analytical approach for the qualitative data by describing the analysis technique employed in this study (such as thematic analysis, grounded theory, or content analysis). The Authors should include a rationale for the chosen approach, by connecting it to the study’s objectives of understanding lived cross-cultural experiences. Also, the Authors should detail the analysis process by providing a step-by-step description, from data preparation (for instance, transcription or organization of responses) to coding and categorization. The Authors should mention whether it is manual coding or software tools (e.g. NVivo, Atlas.ti) that were employed to ensure systematic analysis. Further, the Authors should highlight the credibility and rigour of the qualitative methodology. This will explain how methodological rigour was applied and maintained, such as through triangulation, peer debriefing, or participant validation, as this will strengthen the transparency and reliability of the study findings. [Line 130 – Line 159].

 

Ethical Considerations

The ethical considerations of this study need to be clearly outlined in a sub-theme. Ensure that informed consent is obtained by briefing participants on the purpose of the study, data usage, confidentiality measures, and their right to withdraw freely at any stage. Privacy and confidentiality must be prioritized, including anonymizing data and implementing secure storage protocols to prevent unauthorized access. Given the emotional sensitivity of topics related to pandemic-related and cross-cultural challenges, address participant vulnerabilities by providing access to psychological support resources and fostering a respectful, empathetic environment during qualitative data collection.

 

Result section

The results of this study should be presented by making each objectives as the subthemes. This will help the result presentation more presentable and detailed.

 

Quantitative results

The quantitative results should be reported in a distinct section, organized systematically to align with the study objectives. Ensure that each result is linked explicitly to its corresponding research question or objective. Utilize appropriate statistical tables, charts, or graphs to visually display the data, making it easier to interpret trends and relationships. Avoid mixing these results with qualitative findings, as separating them ensures clarity and maintains the integrity of the analysis.

 

Qualitative results

The qualitative results should be reported in a dedicated section, clearly separated from the quantitative findings. Organize these results thematically, aligning them with the specific objectives of the study. Provide illustrative quotes or excerpts from participants to support and enrich the analysis, ensuring they are directly tied to the research goals. This separation maintains clarity and enhances the narrative coherence of the findings while ensuring that the qualitative data stands out as a distinct contribution to the study.

 

Discussion section

To improve the discussion section, the Authors should ensure that the results are interpreted in the context of the study's objectives and existing literature. The Authors should highlight how the findings contribute to understanding the sense of belonging among international students during the COVID-19 pandemic, addressing both expected and unexpected outcomes. In addition, the Authors should discuss the practical and theoretical implications, such as how institutions can better support international students or create inclusive environments. The Authors should acknowledge the study's limitations, such as sample size or potential biases, and propose areas for future research to build on these insights. Finally, the Authors should connect the findings to broader themes, emphasizing their relevance to global discussions on mental health, cultural adaptation, and equity in education during times of covid-19 crisis. [line 370 – Line 430].

 

Strengths and limitations section

The Authors should enhance the strengths and limitations of the study, by clearly highlighting the robust methodological aspects that supported reliable and meaningful data collection, such as the use of established tools like Qualtrics for quantitative surveys and thematic analysis for qualitative insights. The Authors should emphasize the significance of focusing on international students during the COVID-19 pandemic, by showcasing the relevance and timeliness of the research. In addition, for the study limitations, the Authors should discuss the potential constraints such as sample size, response biases, or challenges in recruiting the sampled participants. However,  addressing how these limitations may impact the generalizability of this study's findings while suggesting strategies or directions for future research to address these gaps and build upon the study’s contributions. [Line 431]

 

Study implications

The Authors should enhance the study implications section, by explicitly discussing the practical, theoretical, and policy-oriented contributions of this study. The Authors should highlight how the study findings can inform institutional strategies to improve the sense of belonging for international students, particularly in times of global crises like the COVID-19 pandemic. The Authors should emphasize the broader societal relevance by connecting the study to the ongoing discussions about equity, mental health, and cross-cultural inclusion in educational settings. Additionally, the Authors should outline the potential applications of the research in developing support programmes or interventions tailored to the needs of international students. This will underscore the study's impact in fostering an inclusive and adaptive academic environment for international students. [Line 432]

 

 

 

Conclusion

The conclusion should succinctly summarize the key findings of the study, emphasizing how they address the objectives and contribute to understanding international students' sense of belonging during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the Authors should reiterate the research significance, by highlighting its practical, theoretical, and societal implications. The Authors should conclude with a forward-looking perspective, suggesting how the insights gained from this study can inform future studies, institutional policies, and support systems that will enhance cross-cultural inclusion and student well-being, especially international students. The Authors should ensure that the tone is both reflective and optimistic, underscoring the value of the research in navigating similar challenges shortly. [Line 433 – Line 441]

 

Recommendations section

The Authors should ensure that the recommendations are practical, actionable, and directly derived from the study's findings. They should highlight the specific steps institutions can take to foster a stronger sense of belonging among international students, such as implementing targeted support programmes, by enhancing cultural inclusion efforts and providing mental health resources tailored to cross-cultural challenges. The Authors should recommend further research to address gaps or limitations identified in this study, by suggesting areas such as longitudinal studies or comparisons across different cultural contexts. Further, the Authors should propose key policy changes or institutional frameworks that can help prevent similar challenges during future global crises, ensuring this study's findings have a lasting impact. [Line 442]

 

References and in-citations

The Authors should ensure that all references and in-text citations are accurately formatted according to the specified citation style (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago). The Authors should verify that every in-text citation corresponds to a complete reference in the bibliography or reference list. Cross-check for consistency in formatting, such as author names, publication years, and titles. The Authors should pay attention to missing citations or improperly cited sources, and ensure that direct quotes, paraphrased content, and borrowed ideas are appropriately attributed. In addition, the Authors should review the placement and relevance of citations to ensure they support the argument effectively and adhere to academic integrity standards. [Line 453 – Line 530].

 

Proofreading and editing

The Authors should conduct a meticulous review to identify and correct grammatical errors, awkward phrasing, and inconsistencies in the tone or style of the entire manuscript. The Authors should ensure that the language is clear, concise, and professional, aligning with the intended audience's expectations. The Authors should pay close attention to the proper use of terminology, consistency in referencing, and formatting adherence to journal or style guidelines. Additionally, they should streamline sentences for readability and eliminate redundant expressions to maintain a logical and coherent flow throughout the document. [Line 1 – Line 530]

 

 

 

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your feedback. Please see the attachment for our reply.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I can see the manuscript has been updated. However, the authors did not hold focus group interviews, which makes me hesitant to fully endorse the justifications presented on lines 190-195. They should highlight in the limitations section that a focus group interview was not conducted due to….”

Line 281, "2.4. Limitations" The readers may confuse I suggest authors should move this limitation section to the last paragraph in the discussion section, where authors have mentioned limitations.

The type and range of data generated through the social interaction of the group are often deeper and richer than those obtained from one-to-one interviews (Thomas et al). Focus group interviews are crucial to gain a deeper understanding of a topic than individual interviews could, as in healthcare research, as they are useful for exploring collective perspectives, attitudes, behaviors, and experiences. I believe this is what authors wanted to know in their research questions.

Author Response

Comments:

I can see the manuscript has been updated. However, the authors did not hold focus group interviews, which makes me hesitant to fully endorse the justifications presented on lines 190-195. They should highlight in the limitations section that a focus group interview was not conducted due to….”

Line 281, "2.4. Limitations" The readers may confuse I suggest authors should move this limitation section to the last paragraph in the discussion section, where authors have mentioned limitations.

Reply:

We sincerely thank the reviewer for raising this critical methodological consideration. As suggested, we have removed the Limitations section on lines 190-195 and provided more information in the limitation paragraphs at the end of the discussion section (marked in yellow) to explicitly acknowledge the absence of focus group interviews and clarify the rationale for this design choice. Specifically, we added the following points: 

• We recognize that individual interviews and surveys may not capture the collective perspectives and social dynamics that focus groups could reveal, particularly regarding shared experiences of belonging or exclusion. 

• Ethical and Methodological Justification: We clarified that the decision to forgo focus groups was intentional, prioritizing participant confidentiality and mitigating power dynamics in group settings, given the sensitive nature of international students’ experiences (e.g., cultural adjustment challenges, exclusion). 

• Future Recommendations: We proposed actionable solutions, such as anonymized digital focus groups or sequential mixed-methods designs, to address this gap in future work. 

Thanks again for your feedback.

Reviewer 2 Report

This research offers a unique perspective on the experiences of international students during the COVID-19 pandemic, revealing how crises shape their sense of belonging. While existing studies focus on academic and structural challenges, this work uniquely captures adaptation’s emotional and social dimensions. By highlighting cultural differences, resilience, and institutional support, it provides timely insights into how universities can foster inclusivity during disruptions. The study’s depth offers valuable policy recommendations, though a broader comparative analysis or follow-up on long-term outcomes could further enrich its impact. Overall, it contributes meaningfully to discussions on student mobility and crisis response.

This section is fine, and there are no further comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments:

This research offers a unique perspective on the experiences of international students during the COVID-19 pandemic, revealing how crises shape their sense of belonging. While existing studies focus on academic and structural challenges, this work uniquely captures adaptation’s emotional and social dimensions. By highlighting cultural differences, resilience, and institutional support, it provides timely insights into how universities can foster inclusivity during disruptions. The study’s depth offers valuable policy recommendations, though a broader comparative analysis or follow-up on long-term outcomes could further enrich its impact. Overall, it contributes meaningfully to discussions on student mobility and crisis response.

Reply:

Thank you for your thoughtful and encouraging feedback. We appreciate your recognition of the study’s unique contribution in highlighting the emotional and social dimensions of international student adaptation during the COVID-19 pandemic. We are especially grateful for your confirmation of the revisions and will consider your suggestion regarding broader comparative or longitudinal analyses for future work.