Review of Research on Technology-Supported Cross-Cultural Learning

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript reviews the studies of cross-cultural learning based on the development of communication technologies between 2014 and 2020. It focuses on twenty-three publications in the top nineteen SSCI journals, emphasising theoretical foundation, curricula, technologies, and methodology and findings. It is proposed to contribute to teaching and learning practices related to cross-cultural communications.

 

The authors analysed the existing review research on cross-cultural education and identified the issues highlighted in this paper: up-to-date data and supporting technologies. Within this scope, the study builds a systematic framework and provides an evidence-based meta-analysis. It is a well-structured and well-presented work. 

 

Points to consider in subsequent versions:

 

• Technology, the key feature of present cross-cultural learning should be highlighted and repeated throughout.

 

• Suggest to re-think: the development of online learning technologies is not a result of financial shortage (p.2); instead, it is a reason or an accelerator for the transforming communication and education methods.

 

• In the introduction section, it is better to clarify the concepts -- 'cross-cultural communication' vs. 'cross-cultural learning', 'communication technology' vs. 'technological tools' (p.11, i.e., the Internet, the social media).

 

• Figure 2, the analytical framework is not appropriate as the review categories, the methodology and the findings should not be separated or individual but interact with each other.

 

• Another suggestion is to add the study's genesis to the Abstract and remain all research findings in the main body.

 

• Complete the referencing sources (i.e., the concepts of culture and cross-cultural learning (p.1), 'Authors' in the end-text references).

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1, thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions. Please find our detailed responses in the attached file. We hope that all comments were addressed satisfactorily. Please let us know if you have any further comments and suggestions. Thank you!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

line 128 - The Peer-Reviewed Instructional Materials Online Database (PRIMO) - I could not find it as a database but as a collection of instructional materials

Great similarity was found between published research and the information provided in lines 42-43, 122-139, 161-162, 167-169, 176-180. However, as the information was cited, it cannot be considered as plagiarism. I suggest rephrasing them. 

Part of the data presented in the annexes and discussed in the Results chapter could have been put in a visual form (for example, using atlas.ti or NVivo qualitative data analysis software) for a clearer picture of the findings.

The review of the qualitative studies could have presented the size effects of the reviewed research for a better support of the findings.

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2, thank you for your useful comments and suggestions. We have addressed them and our detailed responses can be found in the attached file. We hope that you will be satisfied with our responses. Please let us know if you have any further comments and suggestions. Thank you!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf