Roll the Dice—Let’s See If Differences Really Matter! Accounting Judgments and Sustainable Decisions in the Light of a Gender and Age Analysis

General comment: “This study analyzes the impact of auditor characteristics on accounting judgement and sustainable decision based on survey data. Results show that women are more interested in accounting regulation, ethical behavior and collaboration than men. In contrast, men are not only more independent of judgments and skeptical than women, but also pay more attention to accuracy, sustainable judgement and evaluation of goodwill. This result can be judged to be an important result in understanding the characteristics of accountants.”

Reply/response:

First of all – thank you for your time spent on this review, for your insightful, valuable and constructive comments which are going to strengthen our manuscript.

Thank you for these thorough and positive comments on our paper and for the appreciation of our undertaken effort in tackling this topic.

We are pleased that you enjoyed the paper and appreciate your succinct summary of our analysis. Indeed, we believe our results can be judged to be an important result in highlighting and understanding the existing “lights and shadows” in the perceptual differences on how auditors and accountants develop professional judgment.

All our findings may be considered a further validation of the migration from a profession with clearly masculine characteristics to a feminine one, which also impacts the professional reasoning from the perspective of gender analysis.

Change/revision: -

Final remark:

In this context, we would like to bring to your attention the novelty of our results on specific elements, and, thus, we would like to emphasize that the present study focuses on those facets that are significantly related to the influence of gender and age on professional judgment and sustainable accounting decisions. To our knowledge, the present research is the first to report on in Eastern-Europe, since these aspects have not been addressed so far in Romania, nor in other CEE countries.

Comment 1: “You need to write about why you have chosen to focus on Romania. Because accountant is characterized differently in different countries, we want you to explain the benefits of making the claims of this study available internationally. In other words, I would like you to explain how much this data will ensure the generality of your results. If this is difficult, then you need to describe the problems in data selection as limitations. In that case, you would also need to explain why Romania's data are not generalisable and therefore limited.”

Reply/response:  

We once again express our gratitude for the reviewer’s observations and comments, it helped improving the quality of our work.

1.1.   The study was undertaken solely in Romania, first of all, because of logistical and organizational reasons; in order to send the questionnaire for completion it was necessary to create a database with the e-mail addresses of the members of the representative accounting professional body, the Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania (BELAR), data which was obtained from the official Chart of Accountants published in the Official Romanian Gazette. It was also necessary to obtain the official agreement of the Branch Management when the process of submitting the questionnaire started, due to GDPR motives.

In addition, in the current context of implementing the standards and requirements of sustainable development (i.e. SDGs) in emerging countries, we consider the study conducted in Romania is of interest in order to achieve a more realistic assessment of the evolution of the accounting profession, as well as to tackle specific aspects regarding gender (in)equality in emerging countries (in this context, Romania). Gender inequality in emerging markets, as elsewhere in the world, comes in many forms and disguises. Its manifestations range from passive tolerance of systems that deny women equal access to education and employment opportunities, equal pay for equal work, equal rights before the law, and equal political voices. Discriminatory male behavior (and tacit female acceptance of this behavior) or even legalized gender inequality, are by no means unique to emerging markets.

Therefore, we consider gender inequality may be a grander issue in emerging markets than anywhere else in the modern world due to three main reasons:

-         failure in public policy regarding the mitigation of the distributive consequences of rapid growth in emerging markets that, in the last 30 years, has outshined growth in the rest of the world;

-         the major role played by the informal sector in emerging markets, a sector in which a great number of economically active women earn casual and irregular wages from unreliable and often transitory employment;

-         the disruption of traditional familial structures and support systems caused by massive urbanization on an unprecedented scale and at an unparalleled pace.

Our future research, however, aims to perform comparative analyzes between the stage of evolution of the accounting profession in Romania, as well as in Hungary and Croatia.

1.2.   Statistics made using the information disclosed publicly on the website of Romanian accounting professional body (BELAR) on branches’ board members (https://ceccar.ro/ro/?page_id=6176) showed that women professionals engaged in the management of the accounting profession represent 62.84%, while at the level of some branches the percentage of women in the total members is approaching more and more significant numbers (for example, at the level of the Constanta branch, the share is 85% of the total members, according to Ticoi, 2019).

As we have highlighted in Section 4. Results, the percentage of women involved in the accounting profession is around 70%. Similarly, Istrate (2012), looking for an answer behind the growing percentage of women in the Romanian accounting profession, identified certain stereotypes in the behavior of Romanian professional accountants: “the inclination towards more patience, meticulousness and the static nature of the activity”.

These are the main arguments that support the research undertaken in order to identify an authentic answer to the question: Is professional accounting judgment more feminine or masculine?

Therefore, the results obtained cannot be generalized. Conversely, they must be interpreted according to the particularities of an emerging country such as Romania, in which the status of professional accountant differs from that of other countries depending on economic, political, socio-cultural factors, etc.

In the context of the internationalization of accounting, sustainable development and mutations produced in the accounting profession, the current study can be developed through future comparative analyzes, as well as according to other similar landmarks identified in the specialized literature with reference to stereotypes and patterns.

Since we very much appreciate your detailed evaluations and suggestions and we agree with all of them, we thoroughly revised our manuscript according to your advice. The manuscript has been edited and we hope that all the considered issues are now clearer.

Change/revision:

In this context, new paragraphs have been added for clarification purposes:

“The study was undertaken solely in Romania, first of all, because of logistical and organizational reasons; in order to send the questionnaire for completion it was necessary to create a database with the e-mail addresses of the members of the representative accounting professional body, the Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania (BELAR), data which was obtained from the official Chart of Accountants published in the Official Romanian Gazette. It was also necessary to obtain the official agreement of the Branch Management when the process of submitting the questionnaire started, due to GDPR motives.

In addition, in the current context of implementing the standards and requirements of sustainable development (i.e. SDGs) in emerging countries, we consider the study conducted in Romania is of interest in order to achieve a more realistic assessment of the evolution of the accounting profession, as well as to tackle specific aspects regarding gender (in)equality in emerging countries (in this context, Romania). We consider gender inequality might be a grander issue in emerging markets than elsewhere in the modern world due to three main reasons:

-         failure in public policy regarding the mitigation of the distributive consequences of accelerated growth in emerging markets that, in the last three decades has outshined growth in the rest of the world;

-         the major role played by the informal sector in emerging markets, a sector in which a great number of economically active women earn casual and irregular wages from unreliable and often transitory employment;

-         the disruption of traditional familial structures and support systems caused by massive urbanization on an unprecedented scale and at an unparalleled pace.” (lines 276-294)

“Statistics made using the information disclosed publicly on the website of Romanian accounting professional body (BELAR) on branches board members showed that women professionals engaged in the management of the accounting profession represent 62.84%, while at the level of some branches the percentage of women in the total members is approaching more and more significant numbers (for example, at the level of the Constanta branch, the share is 85% of the total members, according to Ticoi, 2019 [76]).

Therefore, the gender distribution of valid answers does not surprise us, considering the statistical data at national level regarding the higher percentage of professional women accountants than men among the members of representative professional organizations in Romania (Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania – BELAR and Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania – CFAR).” (lines 408-418)

“Nonetheless, the results obtained cannot be generalized, Romania’s data not being generalizable and, therefore, limited. Conversely, they must be interpreted according to the particularities of an emerging country such as Romania, in which the status of professional accountant differs from that of other countries depending on economic, political, socio-cultural factors, etc. In the context of the internationalization of accounting, sustainable development and mutations produced in the accounting profession, the current study can be developed through future comparative analyzes, as well as according to other similar landmarks identified in the specialized literature with reference to stereotypes and patterns.” (lines 717-724)

Final remark:

Done accordingly in the revised manuscript – please see sections: “Literature Review and Hypothesis Development”, “Results” and “Conclusions”. (The changes in text appear in green type in the revised paper.)

Comment 2: “You are using an online questionnaire. The benefits of this method have been written down, but I believe that in order to understand your analysis accurately, you need to write down the issues.”

Reply/response:

Thank you for suggesting to present not only the benefits of using the questionnaire as a method, but also its limitations and shortcomings.

Our survey conducted on Romanian accounting professionals attempted to collect evidence to assess the accountants’ perception that was analyzed according to age, gender, experience and professional qualification, services offered and income obtained, as well as personality traits – in order to examine the current state of the Romanian accounting profession regarding the importance of professional accounting judgment and sustainable decisions.

We asked the professional accountants to report on different aspects concerning accounting judgments, estimates and options in the belief that the answers will help us identify the main features of an accurate and authentic professional judgment in accounting, respectively to highlight those factors that influence such judgments and estimates.

On one hand, we have chosen to conduct an online survey due to its advantages, over the much more difficult physical investigation that would have involved long-distance travel in the whole country and would have involved additional costs. We considered that the online survey was suitable both due to the easy access of the respondents to the link where the questionnaire was posted, respectively due to the relatively short time allocated to answering the questions and, subsequently, to collecting them.

On the other hand, the major inconveniences or problems encountered were the following: invalid e-mail addresses (implying a smaller number of respondents and, consequently, a relatively low response rate), higher reluctance of some accounting professionals to answer to some questions, lack of interest in completing questionnaire sections, receiving negative feedback regarding the willingness to answer questions, obtaining negative feedback (or no feedback at all), from the perspective of not understanding the purpose and/or the relevance of completing such a questionnaire.

However, these are inherent issues of any qualitative research based on investigation. Yet, the interest shown in the investigated subject and the request received from several accounting professionals to provide them partial or complete research results were the engines of our motivation to conduct this extensive research, in order to draw some essential conclusions regarding the evolution of the accounting profession in Romania concerning current perceptions on professional accounting judgment and on sustainable decisions, as well as on gender (in)equality.

The study included in this manuscript represents only a part of our research carried out on this topic.

We have also done our utmost to comply with your request regarding the aforementioned aspects. As indicated, we attempted to bring a better comprehension of the issues of using an online questionnaire as a research method, as well as a more profound discussion on why the benefits surpass all these shortcomings.

Change/revision:

In this context, a new paragraph has been added for clarification purposes:

“Nonetheless, the major inconveniences or problems encountered were the following: invalid e-mail addresses (implying a smaller number of respondents and, consequently, a relatively low response rate), higher reluctance of some accounting professionals to answer to some questions, lack of interest in completing questionnaire sections, receiving negative feedback regarding the willingness to answer questions, obtaining negative feedback (or no feedback at all), from the perspective of not understanding the purpose and/or the relevance of completing such a questionnaire.

However, these are inherent issues of any qualitative research based on investigation. Yet, the interest shown in the investigated subject and the request received from several accounting professionals to provide them partial or complete research results were the engines of our motivation to conduct this extensive research, in order to draw some essential conclusions regarding the evolution of the accounting profession in Romania concerning current perceptions on professional accounting judgment and on sustainable decisions, as well as on gender (in)equality.” (lines 334-346)

Final remark:

Done accordingly in the revised manuscript – please see section: “Materials and Methods”. (The changes in text appear in green type in the revised paper.)

Comment 3: “(Page 8, lines 356-358)

Here you guys are describing the sample that resulted from the study. The results show that there is a difference in sample size between males and females. This is an interesting result, and you guys have also stated the cause of this. But is this not biased data? In other words, is it not possible that men with smaller sample sizes are more likely to have a more service-oriented sample of men? Please explain this point.”

Reply/response:

Thank you for your constructive feedback. We are very much aware about the fact that our scientific approach is extremely thought-provoking and is, indeed, challenging to bring relevant and robust data and arguments to support or reject it.

We acknowledge that the discussion on sample could have been more exhaustive. Therefore, we appreciate you for making the point that the manuscript needed more background information and we are extremely grateful for pointing out these aspects.

As suggested, we now include a more thorough discussion that describes the aforementioned points.

As we found in the analysis of the local specialty literature regarding the stereotypes in the accounting profession, the years of communism marked their defining features. Thus, as statistics at the national level indicate, the share of women among the members of the representative professional bodies (Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania – BELAR and Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania – CFAR) has increased from one year to another (Albu et al., 2011; Istrate, 2012; Ticoi and Albu, 2018; Del Baldo et al., 2018).

Nowadays, this profession in Romania is perceived as one that requires a lot of patience, meticulousness, involving repetitive, static activities and is not infrequently understood as an extremely routine profession such as a woman's housework. These considerations determine that in the accounting profession, in an emerging country like Romania, more and more women want practice in this field. As additional proof is the large number of professional female accountants. Graduates of higher economic studies in the field of accounting are mostly women, as well, therefore, the share of women who want to become professional accountants increasing.

Change/revision:

Thank you for reminding us how important it is to present information on sample in a concise way. We agree that better explanation on the difference in sample size between males and females would be more accurate and precise and have taken your advice.

We found your comments extremely helpful in strengthening our research – and we agree that our explanation might seem speculative at this time, therefore we have revised accordingly in our pursuing to make our study as convincing as possible. We have edited the text in the “Materials and Methods” and “Results” sections in order to state that our findings and conclusions are only suggested by our endeavour and results.

Hence, in order to address your concerns, we developed the “Materials and Methods” and “Results” sections, by adding new paragraphs for clarification purposes, describing our reasoning.

 “As we found in the analysis of the local specialty literature regarding the stereotypes in the accounting profession, the years of communism marked their defining features. Thus, as statistics at the national level indicate, the share of women among the members of the representative professional bodies (Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania – BELAR and Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania – CFAR) has increased from one year to another (Albu et al., 2011; Istrate, 2012; Ticoi and Albu, 2018; Del Baldo et al., 2018) [73,72,74,75].

Nowadays, this profession in Romania is perceived as one that requires a lot of patience, meticulousness, involving repetitive, static activities and is not infrequently understood as an extremely routine profession such as a woman's housework. These considerations determine that in the accounting profession, in an emerging country like Romania, more and more women want practice in this field.” (lines 383-393)

Henceforward, we believe this – along with our response to your previous comment (Comment #2) –  sets the information out clearly and comparatively (with our own results) and is a format that readers will readily return to when seeking information on the manuscript’s scribes and production.

Final remark:

Done accordingly in the revised manuscript – please see sections: “Materials and Methods” and “Results”. (The changes in text appear in green type in the revised paper.)

Comment 4: “Many citation errors. I think they may have mislabeled it. Please be sure to check.”

Reply/response:

Thank you for your observation and for bringing this technical error to our attention; the problem has been fixed. 

We have checked again all the tables and figures, respectively their citation in the main text of our manuscript. In the uploaded version of our paper all the reference sources were found and correctly cited. We assume that probably the processing of the manuscript generated these nonconformities.

We will also double-check the hyperlinks in the final publication PDF.

Change/revision:

We checked and revised accordingly; the problem has been fixed.

Final remark:

Corrected accordingly in the revised manuscript.

Comment 5: “Looking at the results in Table 1, I suspect that practical experience may be more important in accounting than age.”

Reply/response:

Thank you for your thoughtful remark and for your inputs.

We agree the analysis of the influence of years of practical experience in accounting on the exercise of professional accounting judgment and sustainable decisions is an interesting and relevant topic, therefore it is the objective of another research.

Consequently, we did not focus on investigating the correlation with accounting practice, since we dedicated this research strictly to gender and age influences, our study being designed to focus specifically on these two aspects. We would, therefore, like to keep the focus intact, but we have included your point as a consideration for future study. Thank you once again for the suggestion.

Change/revision: -

Final remark:

We will definitely approach these aspects in a future research, as also stated in our response to your first comment (Comment #1).

We agree that the practical experience may be more important in accounting than age, this also being is an important line of study. We have now acknowledged this and suggested it as a topic for further research in the Conclusion section of the revised manuscript (page 22, lines 717–724).

Comment 6: “In Table 4 ,10 and 12, important numbers related to the hypothesis should be bolded or underlined for clarity.”

Reply/response:

Thank you for your assessment.

Change/revision:

We highlighted where significant differences were relevant, using bold. We have also introduced a new line under each table stating:

“*Note: Important criteria related to the hypothesis have been bolded for clarity.”

Final remark:

Done accordingly in the revised manuscript – please see Tables 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 and 12, respectively the note made under each table. (The changes in text appear in green type in the revised paper.)

General comment: “Useful empirical research. Limited range of countries to one but quite useful work. The approach seems sound good, conclusions were mostly okay.”

Reply/response:

First of all – thank you for your time spent on this review, for your insightful, valuable and constructive comments which are going to strengthen our manuscript.

Thank you for these thorough and positive comments on our paper and for the appreciation of our undertaken effort in tackling this topic.

We are pleased that you enjoyed the paper and appreciate your succinct summary of our analysis. Indeed, we believe our results can be judged to be an important result in highlighting and understanding the existing “lights and shadows” in the perceptual differences on how auditors and accountants develop professional judgment.

All our findings may be considered a further validation of the migration from a profession with clearly masculine characteristics to a feminine one, which also impacts the professional reasoning from the perspective of gender analysis.

Change/revision: -

Final remark:

In this context, we would like to bring to your attention the novelty of our results on specific elements, and, thus, we would like to emphasize that the present study focuses on those facets that are significantly related to the influence of gender and age on professional judgment and sustainable accounting decisions. To our knowledge, the present research is the first to report on in Eastern-Europe, since these aspects have not been addressed so far in Romania, nor in other CEE countries.

Comment 1: “Line 356-359:

The authors stated: In our survey, out of the 531 Professional Accountants who responded to the questionnaire, 124 are men and 397 are women. It can be presumed that the much higher response rate obtained from women shows that the interest in understanding the issues that influence accounting judgments, estimates and accounting decisions is grander for female accountants than for male accountants but the unknown is how many out of 2,800 questionnaires were sent to women and how many to men. Therefore the statement mentioned above is questionable because it may be due to the higher percentage of women Professional Accountants involved in the accounting profession than men.”

Reply/response:

We once again express our gratitude for the reviewer’s observations and comments, it helped improving the quality of our work.

Statistics made using the information disclosed publicly on the website of Romanian accounting professional body (BELAR) on branches’ board members (https://ceccar.ro/ro/?page_id=6176) showed that women professionals engaged in the management of the accounting profession represent 62.84%, while at the level of some branches the percentage of women in the total members is approaching more and more significant numbers (for example, at the level of the Constanta branch, the share is 85% of the total members, according to Ticoi, 2019).

As we have highlighted in Section 4. Results, the percentage of women involved in the accounting profession is around 70%. Similarly, Istrate (2012), looking for an answer behind the growing percentage of women in the Romanian accounting profession, identified certain stereotypes in the behavior of Romanian professional accountants: “the inclination towards more patience, meticulousness and the static nature of the activity”.

These are the main arguments that support the research undertaken in order to identify an authentic answer to the question: Is professional accounting judgment more feminine or masculine?

Therefore, the results obtained cannot be generalized. Conversely, they must be interpreted according to the particularities of an emerging country such as Romania, in which the status of professional accountant differs from that of other countries depending on economic, political, socio-cultural factors, etc.

In the context of the internationalization of accounting, sustainable development and mutations produced in the accounting profession, the current study can be developed through future comparative analyzes, as well as according to other similar landmarks identified in the specialized literature with reference to stereotypes and patterns.

Since we very much appreciate your detailed evaluations and suggestions and we agree with all of them, we thoroughly revised our manuscript according to your advice. The manuscript has been edited and we hope that all the considered issues are now clearer.

Change/revision:

In this context, new paragraphs have been added for clarification purposes:

“The study was undertaken solely in Romania, first of all, because of logistical and organizational reasons; in order to send the questionnaire for completion it was necessary to create a database with the e-mail addresses of the members of the representative accounting professional body, the Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania (BELAR), data which was obtained from the official Chart of Accountants published in the Official Romanian Gazette. It was also necessary to obtain the official agreement of the Branch Management when the process of submitting the questionnaire started, due to GDPR motives.

In addition, in the current context of implementing the standards and requirements of sustainable development (i.e. SDGs) in emerging countries, we consider the study conducted in Romania is of interest in order to achieve a more realistic assessment of the evolution of the accounting profession, as well as to tackle specific aspects regarding gender (in)equality in emerging countries (in this context, Romania). We consider gender inequality might be a grander issue in emerging markets than elsewhere in the modern world due to three main reasons:

-         failure in public policy regarding the mitigation of the distributive consequences of accelerated growth in emerging markets that, in the last three decades has outshined growth in the rest of the world;

-         the major role played by the informal sector in emerging markets, a sector in which a great number of economically active women earn casual and irregular wages from unreliable and often transitory employment;

-            the disruption of traditional familial structures and support systems caused by massive urbanization on an unprecedented scale and at an unparalleled pace.” (lines 276-294)

“Statistics made using the information disclosed publicly on the website of Romanian accounting professional body (BELAR) on branches board members showed that women professionals engaged in the management of the accounting profession represent 62.84%, while at the level of some branches the percentage of women in the total members is approaching more and more significant numbers (for example, at the level of the Constanta branch, the share is 85% of the total members, according to Ticoi, 2019 [76]).

Therefore, the gender distribution of valid answers does not surprise us, considering the statistical data at national level regarding the higher percentage of professional women accountants than men among the members of representative professional organizations in Romania (Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania – BELAR and Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania – CFAR).” (lines 408-418)

“Nonetheless, the results obtained cannot be generalized, Romania’s data not being generalizable and, therefore, limited. Conversely, they must be interpreted according to the particularities of an emerging country such as Romania, in which the status of professional accountant differs from that of other countries depending on economic, political, socio-cultural factors, etc. In the context of the internationalization of accounting, sustainable development and mutations produced in the accounting profession, the current study can be developed through future comparative analyzes, as well as according to other similar landmarks identified in the specialized literature with reference to stereotypes and patterns.” (lines 717-724)

Final remark:

Done accordingly in the revised manuscript – please see sections: “Literature Review and Hypothesis Development”, “Results” and “Conclusions”. (The changes in text appear in green type in the revised paper.)

Comment 2: “All tables and figures should be cited in the main text. There are mistakes in line 364, 378, 390, 444, 453, 486-487, 498, 541-542, 555, 575, 601: Error! Reference source not found.

The results will be more clear to understand if the tables and figures are correctly cited..”

Reply/response:

Thank you for your observation and for bringing this technical error to our attention; the problem has been fixed. 

We have checked again all the tables and figures, respectively their citation in the main text of our manuscript. In the uploaded version of our paper all the reference sources were found and correctly cited. We assume that probably the processing of the manuscript generated these nonconformities.

We will also double-check the hyperlinks in the final publication PDF.

Change/revision:

We checked and revised accordingly; the problem has been fixed.

Final remark:

Corrected accordingly in the revised manuscript.

Comment 3: “There are some inconsistencies in the sample size in the results presented in tables 3-12.

In line 321-322 the authors write: 531 valid responses were obtained and, subsequently, processed using statistical methods and tests. There is no comment on the sample size in tables because it varies.

Moreover, the statistical differences should be marked in each table, e.i. bold it.”

Reply/response:

Thank you so much for catching these confusing inaccuracies, which we have now amended. We found your comments extremely helpful and have revised accordingly, by modifying several aspects of the manuscript in order to cover the issues you raised.

Since we very much appreciate your detailed evaluations and suggestions, and we agree with most of them, we thoroughly revised our manuscript according to your advice. The manuscript has been edited and we hope that all the considered issues are now clearer.

Change/revision:

3.1.   Thank you for reminding us how important it is to present information on sample in a concise way. We agree that better explanation on the difference in sample size between males and females would be more accurate and precise and have taken your advice.

We found your comments extremely helpful in strengthening our research – and have revised accordingly in our pursuing to make our study as convincing as possible.  

Hence, in order to address your concerns, we developed the “Materials and Methods” and “Discussions” sections, by adding a paragraph, describing our reasoning.

Henceforth, a new paragraph has been added for clarification purposes:

 “In some of the analyses, especially in independent sample tests, we eliminated non-responses listwise to present the most relevant data. That means that in the case of questions using the Likert 5-level ordinal scale, in case a non-response was recorded to one item, we did not consider that respondents answered to all items in the scale. Consequently, in some tables the number of responses is significantly smaller compared to the total sample.”  (lines 356-360)

Henceforward, we believe this sets the information out clearly and comparatively (with our own results) and is a format that readers will readily return to when seeking information on the manuscript’s scribes and production.

3.2.   We highlighted where significant differences were relevant, using bold. We have also introduced a new line under each table stating:

“*Note: Important criteria related to the hypothesis have been bolded for clarity.”

Final remark:

Done accordingly in the revised manuscript – please see section: “Materials and Methods”, as well as Tables 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 and 12, respectively the note made under each table. (The changes in text appear in green type in the revised paper.)

Comment 4: “The questionnaire should be available online because it will increase the citation of the article.”

Reply/response:

We express our thanks to the reviewer’s recommendation to provide more information. As suggested, an additional file, consisting of the questionnaire, was uploaded as "Supplementary File". The supplementary file is available as part of the peer-review process. Due to the length of the questionnaire, we will let the Editors decide whether it can also be included in another Section of the manuscript, as an Appendix.

Change/revision:

The full questionnaire was uploaded as “Supplementary File” and is now available as part of the peer-review process.

Final remark:

Done accordingly. We will kindly ask the Editor to assess whether the questionnaire can also be included in the manuscript, as an Appendix, due to length limitation of the article.