Temperament, Character and Cognitive Emotional Regulation in the Latent Profile Classification of Smartphone Addiction in University Students
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The study is written in very poor English. It has many illogical sentences and mistakes. Thus, it is extremely hard to read. For example, the last two aims are incomprehensible.
The analyses are complex, but based on the poor language, it is hard to understand their flow.
Again, the discussion section is unclear and the contribution of the paper is not explicit.
Author Response
Thanks for the nice comment.
It has been supplemented as faithfully as possible.
If you let us know what needs to be improved, we will improve it.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors explore the actual problem of smartphone addiction using a person-centered approach. They consider smartphone addiction in relation to the indicators of temperament, character and Cognitive Emotional Regulation in Korean students, which is significant from the theoretical and practical point of view.
One of the main purposes of this study is to identify latent profiles for smartphone addiction. However, in my opinion, the use of latent analysis in this case did not allow the authors to identify truly “latent” classes: three obvious classes of respondents were obtained - with (1) low, (2) medium and (3) high level of smartphone addiction. Moreover, for 5 out of 6 subdomains of the Smartphone Addiction Scale, similar differences between classes were obtained (3>2>1). Most likely, such a result could have been obtained using simpler statistical methods. In this regard, I see no point in conducting further correlation and, especially, regression analysis separately for each group (class).
I suggest that the authors use a simpler and more traditional analysis scheme: first, a correlation analysis of all smartphone addiction indicators (6 subdomains and the total score) with studied indicators of temperament, character and emotions for the total sample, and second, a regression analysis for each smartphone addiction subdomains. It is also desirable in the article to pay more attention to the psychological analysis and interpretation of the results, and not only to the description of the statistical characteristics.
Regardless of whether or not the authors accept my proposals, I ask them to prepare the abstract for the article more carefully: it is necessary to more fully reflect the most key findings of the study in the abstract and correct annoying typos in the terms (Temperament vs. Temperature, Cognitive vs. Cernative, Latent vs. Lanted, etc.).
Author Response
Thanks for the nice comment.
It has been supplemented as faithfully as possible.
If you let us know what needs to be improved, we will improve it.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
To the authors:
The purpose of this study to analyze the potential profile of smartphone addiction considering individual characteristics seems to us to be of interest for the advancement of knowledge of this behavioral addiction. In particular, the methodology applied to address the stated objectives is adequate and the assessment instruments are suitable.
I have only a few comments that I hope could be helpful in improving the manuscript.
Abstract
· It is not clear from the abstract what the research objectives are. We recommend that the authors redraft the abstract to include this aspect.
Introduction
· It would be advisable to include some data about the prevalence rates of this behavioral addiction provided in some recent studies (see for example the work of Haug, Paz, Kwon, Filler, Kowatsch & Schaube, 2015).
· We suggest rewording lines 67-71 as their content is not clear.
· We recommend correcting the repetition of terms in lines 91-92: "its validity and validity".
Method
· We suggest commenting in more detail on the data collection procedure. The authors only state that: "This study used convenience sampling to recruit participants from regional universities in Gwangju, Daejeon, and Busan". Some aspects to consider could be, for example: were the self-reports administered in class sessions, as a voluntary activity/task, or were they part of any subject activities; were any incentives provided to students for the completion of the evaluation material (e.g., in the grade of any subject)?
· The heading of Table 1 needs to be corrected.
o Talbe 1. Basic Analysis of Smartphone addcition, Personality, Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategy of Study Participants.
· It would also be convenient, in Table 1, to homogenise the labels about the strategies derived from the Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire taking into consideration how they are described in the measures section: "adaptive cognitive and emotional control strategy" and "maladaptive cognitive and emotional control strategy".
· We suggest referring to the main psychometric properties of the different assessment instruments used in this study.
Discussion
· We advise to the authors, taking into account the title of the paper and the assessment instrument they use, to refer to temperament and character not to temperament and personality (see, for example, line 337).
· We recommend, based on the authors' statement "In this study, there was an interim difference influencing smartphone addiction by group according to the latent profile classification, which differs from the results of previous studies [64, 74]", that they provide some explanation about the differences found in their results when compared with those obtained in previous studies.
· We consider it necessary for the authors to refer to the main limitations of this study.
References
· We suggest that the authors review the references section. Some references are incomplete. For example:
· Pearson, C.; Hussain, Z. Smartphone addiction and associated psychological factors. 2016;
· Cloninger, C. R. Brain networks underlying personality development. Psychopathology and the brain. 1991, 183-208;
· Davidson, B. I.; Shaw, H.; Ellis, D. Fuzzy Constructs: The Overlap between Mental Health and Technology 'Use'. 2020.
Author Response
Thanks for the nice comment.
It has been supplemented as faithfully as possible.
If you let us know what needs to be improved, we will improve it.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear authors,
The topic covered in your article is current and of interest to specialists. Congratulations!
My suggestion is to explain from a practical, applied point of view how such studies and analyzes can contribute to improving the quality of life of the population, which is the medium and long-term solution. In the conclusion chapter, I suggest you include a series of recommendations to support young people and specialists from different fields and areas of activity.
Best regards,
Gabriela Neagu
Author Response
Thank you for your evaluation and review of this paper.
I have faithfully supplemented the reviewer's comments as in the attachment.
thank you
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The text is more digestible to read. However, now there are other concerns that arise. Firstly, the introduction contains many theoretical inaccuracies and does not support the research questions (which are still really hard to understand). Moreover, the lack of hypotheses makes this study look rather exploratory.
The theoretical support is weak and thus, the reasoning behind the study is unclear. While I appreciate the authors' statistical prowess, I still recommend rejection.
Author Response
Thank you for your evaluation and review of this paper.
I have faithfully supplemented the reviewer's comments as in the attachment.
thank you
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
I thank you for your attention to my remarks. I see that the article has been significantly edited in terms of the content and style of the English language. Now the article looks much more holistic, logical and evidence-based. I can recommend it for publication.
Author Response
Thank you for your evaluation and review of this paper.
I have faithfully supplemented the reviewer's comments as in the attachment.
thank you
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
-
