Active Learning in an Environment of Innovative Training and Sustainability. Mapping of the Conceptual Structure of Research Fronts through a Bibliometric Analysis
, Álvaro Manuel Úbeda-Sánchez 1, José Álvarez-Rodríguez 2 and Daniel Álvarez-Ferrándiz 3
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is an interesting manuscript however the presentation of the findings is not clear. For example, Figure 2 attempts to provide a summary of relationships between top author keywords, top keywords from titles and top 184 keywords from keywords plus, however, the figure only provides a list of words in both sides without signalling their relationship. A similar issue is also identified in Figure 5+6 (figure analysis is very low)
Finally, the conclusions only provide a list of words that emerged from the review -they need to go in-depth for this review to be meaningful.
Author Response
We appreciate all the comments from this reviewer and then proceed to reply to their prompts.
ANSWER: Figures 1 and 2 show the most relevant terms in terms of the number of their frequencies related to the author's keywords, keywords plus, titles and abstract. In these figures (also in figure 2) the highest and most relevant values of agreement between the terms of the three columns can be seen. These concordance values do not appear in the figure itself because after exporting they are lost, but from the biblioshiny interface itself, placing the pointer over each word box appears the concordance value, which are the numbers that appear in the text as explanations . We consider these figures as the preamble to the main terms that later, many of them, will be confirmed as the new thematic trend lines that are beginning to emerge around the topic "" active learning ".
On the other hand, we don't know the meaning when it says "top 184 keywords from keywords plus".
In the case of Figures 5 and 6, it can be seen that the relationships between words are no longer as relevant (although it is not without importance) as it is on this occasion to highlight the terms or keywords with the highest co-occurrence value from the analysis of co-words or associated words. Changes have also been made to the text.
On the conclusions, changes have been made to the text.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This bibliometric research focusing on active learning is very up-to-date and important topic. The number of articles and data-bases selected are relevant although the time period is rather short (208-2020, 2020 still left).
The scientometric methods used are relevant, although the quality of Figures 3 and 4 could be improved.
In Figure 7 I wonder what are the "hing methods" (left upper side).
The conclusions presented are evidenced and the discussion of limitations and suggestions for further research are relevant.
Author Response
We appreciate all the comments from this reviewer and then proceed to reply to their prompts.
ANSWER: The time period (2018-2020) finds its main justification in a clear intention to recover the most current works around the topic of “active learning” and try to infer new thematic trends. We understand that by extending the time period to five or even the last ten years, themes and trends could also be obtained that can mark a new thematic trend line, but our intention is focused on the most current published in the scientific literature that even us can provide information on the birth of new trends with a more prospective character to analyze and study in future work. In fact, without being alien to this condition, we already consider / acknowledge in section 4.3. Limitations and Future Work the possible limitations of covering such a short time period.
Indeed, "hing methods" is not any type of specific method, it refers to the term "teaching methods" and is the way in which the Biblioshiny interface displays the graph without us being able to modify it. We are sorry that the word choppy appears.
All the figures in the article were retouched and improved with an image treatment program after being exported from Biblioshiny, giving them the highest quality that we could.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
All comments have been addressed
