Interventions for the Development of Intrinsic Motivation in University Online Education: Systematic Review—Enhancing the 4th Sustainable Development Goal
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper focuses on the intrinsic motivation (IM) of learners in higher education institutions through the 4th Sustainable Development Goal in the UN 2030 Agenda (“ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”).
The authors utilized self-determination theory to investigate IM in university education. To make a systematical review of the IM in university education authors used the PRISMA protocol and performed research in WoS, Scopus, and PubMed databases.
Since the research is associated with the Sustainable Development Goal, the research fits in the scope of the Sustainability Journal. The research is well established as it uses the PRISMA protocol for the systematic review, and the manuscript is written in an appropriate way. The methodology of the paper is safe and sound.
The manuscript has detailed information organized in tables about the 17 papers which were the subject of systematical review after the selection criteria. However, there is no information about the fields, the geographical distribution of researchers, and the employer institution of the research in the manuscript at all. Therefore, I may kindly suggest authors include such information to make the reader clearly see the contemporary situation of research in IM-related research. Additionally, I may also kindly suggest adding a small graph to see the trends in a timeline after Table 2 as much of the literature on IM seems to emerge after year 2013.
When supported by graphics, I think the paper will attract more readers as it eases to understand systematical reviews when visuals are used sufficiently.
In conclusion, the paper contributes to the literature.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
First of all, thank you very much for your comments on our manuscript. We have taken into account the aspects you commented: Table 3 shows the fields and geographical distribution, and we have added a new graph as supplementary material where can be visualized the trends of IM literature in a timeline. We believe that in this way an improvement has been achieved.
Best regards.
Reviewer 2 Report
The topic of interest and the content is well structured.
It is recommended that table 1 and 2 as figure 1, avoid leaving the formats of the document. Do not place the red color in figure 1.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
First of all, thank you very much for your comments on our manuscript. We have taken into account the aspects you commented about formats and colors. We believe that in this way an improvement has been achieved.
Best regards.
Reviewer 3 Report
First of all, happy to the authors for the work done, which is undoubtedly of great interest and value in general and for the educational community in particular.
As a kind suggestion, I would suggest that the authors further strengthen the discussion and not limit it solely to the description of the findings in the selected articles. The results should be discussed from the explanatory models and deepen the suggestions.
Regards
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
First of all, thank you very much for your comments on our manuscript. We have taken into account the aspects you commented: we have elaborated the discussion in more depth and the results have been commented on the basis of explanatory models such as self-determination theory. We believe that in this way an improvement has been achieved.
Best regards.
Reviewer 4 Report
Outstanding contribution to the professional community regarding the development of IM and its importance for online learning. I noted your careful use of methodology for reduction of the professional literature down to the 17 publications tht met the criteria. You carefully supported your paper through extensive references, most of which are within the past five years of publication. Your use of the tables were helpful for the reader, especially #3, for making it easy to see summaries of the data collected. The identification of specific strategies for fostering IM were helpful. I was less certain which strategies were more powerful for fostering IM than other ones. I guess it is up to me as the reader to study the 17 publications to discover more about the evidence. This is the only weak point of your publication. Overall all, a helpful document for anyone who is interested in fostering IM and especially related to online education.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
First of all, thank you very much for your comments on our manuscript. Indeed, as you say, a thorough understanding of all the strategies would require reading all 17 publications. In this case, in the discussion we have reflected in a more general way the possible strategies and tools, providing the advantages that each one can offer, because depending on the context in which they are to be applied, some will be more useful than others. In this way, we guide the reader to delve deeper into those that are closer to their educational reality.
Best regards.
Reviewer 5 Report
I was pleased to review this manuscript. It is well written, carefully constructed, clear to read, and provides many valuable points about the literature that was reviewed.
As the authors note, the field of intrinsic motivation is not well documented. This manuscript does much to bring together the latest and significant work in the field and to present it to readers in a way that will undoubtedly be found helpful in their research and practice.
The present reviewer did not find any problems with the methodology adopted, the findings derived, or the conclusions arrived at.
There are some minor issues with phrasing an d word usage; however, on the whole, the quality and readability of the English language are excellent.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
First of all, thank you very much for your comment on our manuscript. We have taken into account the aspects you commented and we have taken care of the general word usage and phrasing.
Best regards.
