The Impact of Urban Migration on the Mental Well-Being of Young Women: Analyzing the Roles of Neighborhood Safety and Subjective Socioeconomic Status in Shaping Resilience against Life Stressors

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper provides valuable evidence concerning the interaction between significant vulnerability factors for depression amongst an under-researched and large vulnerable group, and thus represents a valuable contribution to the field. It is clear and well presented, and needs only minor language corrections.  

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Just a few minor errors were found, which should be picked up by a grammar checker.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your positive and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate your recognition of the study's value and your thoughtful suggestions for improving the quality of our work. Below, we have addressed each of your comments in detail.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper provides valuable evidence concerning the interaction between significant vulnerability factors for depression amongst an under-researched and large vulnerable group, and thus represents a valuable contribution to the field. It is clear and well presented, and needs only minor language corrections.

Response: Thank you for your kind words regarding the value and clarity of our paper. We have carefully reviewed the manuscript for minor language errors and have made the necessary corrections to ensure grammatical accuracy and coherence.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Just a few minor errors were found, which should be picked up by a grammar checker.

Response: We appreciate your attention to detail regarding the quality of the English language. We have utilized a grammar checking tool to identify and correct minor language errors throughout the manuscript. Additionally, we have had the manuscript reviewed by a colleague fluent in English to ensure the highest possible standard of language quality.

 

Thank you once again for your valuable feedback. We hope these modifications meet your expectations and further strengthen the manuscript. If there are any more aspects of the manuscript that require clarification or additional revision, please let us know. We are committed to making the necessary adjustments until our work meets both your standards and the publication requirements of the journal.

 

Sincerely,

The Authors of Manuscript 2986775

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a well-written study providing relevant findings and implications related to social determinants of mental health which represent one of the key areas which need to be addressed in order to provide much needed comprehensive mental health protection to marginalized and vulnerable populations at risk worldwide.

Below you may find a few suggestions which should be considered and included in the manuscript.

Abstract

“This study evaluates the impact of urban migration on the mental well-being of young women, with a specific focus on the effects of objective life stressors, depression, perceived neighborhood safety, and the influence of subjective socioeconomic status.” The role of depression in your paper is not clear from this sentence since depression is here introduced as as one of the predictors. Please change this and be precise and explicit about depression being the main outcome measure in your study.

Introduction section

The first paragraph is written twice.

Since neighborhood safety is one of the main topics and measures in your study, please add a brief explanation on why Bao'an District, Shenzhen was selected for this study – what are characteristics of these neighborhoods and what was the rationale behind the authors’ decision to choose them.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your positive and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate your recognition of the study's value and your thoughtful suggestions for improving the quality of our work. Below, we have addressed each of your comments in detail.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a well-written study providing relevant findings and implications related to social determinants of mental health which represent one of the key areas which need to be addressed in order to provide much needed comprehensive mental health protection to marginalized and vulnerable populations at risk worldwide. Below you may find a few suggestions which should be considered and included in the manuscript.

Response: Thank you for your kind words regarding the value and clarity of our paper. We appreciate your constructive suggestions to further enhance the manuscript.

1. Abstract

“This study evaluates the impact of urban migration on the mental well-being of young women, with a specific focus on the effects of objective life stressors, depression, perceived neighborhood safety, and the influence of subjective socioeconomic status.” The role of depression in your paper is not clear from this sentence since depression is here introduced as one of the predictors. Please change this and be precise and explicit about depression being the main outcome measure in your study.

Response: Thank you for your insightful comment. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify the role of depression in our study. Depression is utilized as the primary outcome measure in this research to provide a specific, quantifiable indicator of mental health that is widely recognized and measurable across different populations. This focus allows for a detailed analysis of the psychological impacts directly associated with migration-related stressors and adjustments.

In response to your comments, we have made the following revisions to our manuscript:1. Abstract: We have rephrased the abstract to clearly indicate that depression is the primary outcome measure. The revised abstract now reads: “This study evaluates the impact of urban migration on the mental health of young women, focusing specifically on how objective life stressors, perceived neighborhood safety, and subjective socioeconomic status influence depression. Depression is the main outcome measure in this research, serving as a critical indicator of mental health in the context of urban migration.” 2. Introduction (Lines 58-65): We have expanded the sections in the Introduction to explicitly articulate the rationale behind choosing depression as our primary measure. These modifications enhance the clarity of our research framework and emphasize the significance of depression as a crucial aspect of mental health in the context of migration. The revised sections detail how depression, as an outcome measure, provides a specific and quantifiable indicator widely recognized and measurable across different populations.

We believe these revisions directly address your concerns by more clearly defining the role of depression in our study. We are committed to ensuring that our research objectives align precisely with the methods employed, and that the importance of understanding depression in the migration context is underscored.

2. Introduction section

The first paragraph is written twice.

Response: Thank you for your careful review of our manuscript. We appreciate your feedback. We have identified and removed the double-written first paragraph as you suggested. We apologize for the oversight and appreciate your attention to detail.

3. Since neighborhood safety is one of the main topics and measures in your study, please add a brief explanation on why Bao'an District, Shenzhen was selected for this study – what are the characteristics of these neighborhoods and what was the rationale behind the authors’ decision to choose them.

Response: Thank you for your constructive query regarding the selection of Bao’an District, Shenzhen as the study site for our research. Bao’an District is strategically chosen due to its dynamic urban environment and high concentration of migrant populations, particularly young women. This district exemplifies rapid industrialization and urbanization, which are key factors influencing mental health among migrants. The diverse demographic composition and economic activities in Bao’an provide a representative microcosm for understanding the broader implications of urban migration on psychological health. Furthermore, Bao’an’s developed social infrastructure and health services allow an in-depth exploration of how social supports can mitigate the psychological impacts of migration. By focusing on this district, our study leverages a unique setting that enhances the generalizability of our findings to other rapidly developing urban areas. We have added a detailed discussion in the Methods sections (Lines 167-174) of our manuscript to further articulate the rationale behind this selection, ensuring that the study’s objectives are clearly aligned with the chosen geographical context. We believe these additions and clarifications will strengthen the manuscript by highlighting the relevance and thoughtfulness of our methodological approach.

 

Thank you once again for your valuable feedback. We hope these modifications meet your expectations and further strengthen the manuscript. If there are any more aspects of the manuscript that require clarification or additional revision, please let us know.. We are committed to making the necessary adjustments until our work meets both your standards and the publication requirements of the journal.

 

Sincerely,

The Authors of Manuscript 2986775

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

Thank you for trusting me to review your paper entitled " The Impact of Urban Migration on Mental Well-being of Young Women: Analyzing the Roles of Neighborhood Safety and Subjectve SES in Shaping Resilience to Life Stressors.

I found your article interesting. However, I have some minor comments for you in order to strenghen your paper.

a) Title

You should not use the acronym "SES" in your title. Please write it fully. Also, in the whole paper you examine Depression, that has to replace "Mental Well-Being"

b) The first paragraph is double-written. Please remove it.

c) Why did you use education level and marital status as controlled demographic variables? I mean that you should add to your theoretical framework how these variables affect (or not) Depression, Life Stressors etc.

d) lines 213-217

Harman's single factor test should be repeated with fixed factors to 1 and you can present the variance of this factor which has to be lower than 50%.

e) lines 226-230

Correlations are significant but the majority of them are extremely. This is why you have to support better the role of Educational Level and Marital tatus.

f) lines 252-258

Your results would be more understanable and clear if you present them in a table.

g) Table 2

Please divide this table into seperate depending on the moderator. This will make your results clear.

Gnerally, I am very satisfied of authors' effort. It's a good paper, that has only some minor issues to be handled.

I am sure that you will consider my comments for you paper's improvement.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your thoughtful review and your positive feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate your recognition of the value and clarity of our paper. Below, we have addressed each of your comments and suggestions in detail to further improve our manuscript.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a well-written study providing relevant findings and implications related to social determinants of mental health which represent one of the key areas which need to be addressed in order to provide much needed comprehensive mental health protection to marginalized and vulnerable populations at risk worldwide. Below you may find a few suggestions which should be considered and included in the manuscript.

Response: Thank you for your kind words regarding the value and clarity of our paper. We appreciate your constructive suggestions to further enhance the manuscript.

1. a) Title

You should not use the acronym "SES" in your title. Please write it fully. Also, in the whole paper you examine Depression, that has to replace "Mental Well-Being".

Response: Thank you for your insightful comments and suggestions. We have made the following revisions in response to your feedback:

1. The acronym "SES" in the title has been replaced with its full form, "Socioeconomic Status."
2. In this research, depression is utilized as the primary outcome measure to provide a specific, quantifiable indicator of mental health that is widely recognized and measurable across different populations. We have revised the Introduction to explain why we selected depression as the primary measure of mental health in our study. This includes a detailed rationale based on previous research findings that highlight the significance of depression as an indicator of mental health among migrant females(Lines 59-65).
3. Throughout the Results section and other relevant parts of the manuscript, we have replaced "Mental Well-Being" with "Depression" to clearly reflect the specific focus of our study. While we have replaced "Mental Well-Being" with "Depression" in the Results and other sections, we have retained the term "Mental Well-Being" in some parts of the Introduction and Discussion. This is to emphasize our broader concern for the overall mental health of young female migrants.

We believe these changes address your concerns and clarify the focus of our study. However, if you still find any ambiguity or have further suggestions, we are more than willing to make additional revisions.

1. b) The first paragraph is double-written. Please remove it.

Response: Thank you for your careful review of our manuscript. We appreciate your feedback. We have identified and removed the double-written first paragraph as you suggested. We apologize for the oversight and appreciate your attention to detail.

1. c) Why did you use education level and marital status as controlled demographic variables? I mean that you should add to your theoretical framework how these variables affect (or not) Depression, Life Stressors etc.

Response: Thank you for your insightful comments which prompted us to clarify and enhance the role of marital status and education level within our study. We have made substantial revisions to address your points comprehensively:

We have enriched the introduction with a thorough discussion on the influence of marital status and education level on mental health outcomes (Lines 141-147). Drawing from existing literature, we elaborated that married individuals often report better mental health and higher education levels are associated with lower stress and depression. This discussion establishes the basis for including these variables as controls in our study.

We believe these changes thoroughly address your concerns and strengthen the manuscript by providing a clearer linkage between our theoretical framework and the empirical analysis.

 

1. d) Lines 213-217

Harman's single factor test should be repeated with fixed factors to 1 and you can present the variance of this factor which has to be lower than 50%.

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the assessment of common method bias in our study. We have revised the Harman’s single-factor test by fixing the number of factors to 1, as you suggested. The results of this revised analysis indicate that the variance contribution rate of the single factor is 33.803%, which is well below the critical standard of 50% (Lines 233-235). This confirms that common method bias is not a significant issue in our study.

We have updated the manuscript to reflect this analysis. We believe that this revision addresses your concern adequately and enhances the robustness of our study. Thank you once again for your insightful comments.

1. e) Lines 226-230

Correlations are significant but the majority of them are extremely. This is why you have to support better the role of Educational Level and Marital status.

Response: Thank you for your insightful comments which prompted us to clarify and enhance the role of marital status and education level within our study. We have made substantial revisions to address both of your points comprehensively:

1. Introduction:We have enriched the introduction with a thorough discussion on the influence of marital status and education level on mental health outcomes (Lines 141-147). Drawing from existing literature, we elaborated that married individuals often report better mental health and higher education levels are associated with lower stress and depression. This discussion establishes the basis for including these variables as controls in our study.
2. Measures:We succinctly described the measurement methods for marital status and education level in the measures section (Lines 184-190). Marital status was assessed with a single-item question regarding the participant’s marital status (single, married, divorced, or widowed), while education level was categorized based on the highest degree or level of education completed (primary, secondary, or higher education).
3. Discussion:In the discussion section, we explored how the inclusion of these control variables strengthens the robustness of our findings (Lines 369-393). Even after controlling for marital status and education level, our moderated mediation model confirmed that the direct and indirect effects of neighborhood safety perception and life stressors on depression remain significant. This underscores the robustness of our results and the appropriateness of including these variables to control for potential confounding effects.

These revisions not only justify the inclusion of these control variables but also enhance the theoretical depth of our study, providing a comprehensive response to the concerns raised. By integrating and elaborating on these aspects across the introduction, measures, and discussion sections, we aim to affirm the methodological rigor and theoretical alignment of our study with established research norms.

We believe these changes thoroughly address your concerns and strengthen the manuscript by providing a clearer linkage between our theoretical framework and the empirical analysis, affirming the robustness and relevance of our findings within the broader research context.

1. f) Lines 252-258

Your results would be more understandable and clear if you presented them in a table.

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the presentation of our results. To enhance the clarity and understanding of our findings, we have added a table (Table 2) to present the results of the mediation analysis (Lines 281). This table summarizes the direct and indirect effects, along with their respective standard errors, p-values, and confidence intervals.

1. g) Table 2

Please divide this table into separate depending on the moderator. This will make your results clear.

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback. To address your concern regarding Table 2, we have divided it into two separate tables (Table 3a and Table 3b) based on the levels of the moderator, Subjective SES (Lines 297-298). This allows for a clearer presentation of the moderating effects of high and low Subjective SES on the relationship between life stressors and depression. We have also ensured that each table presents the direct and indirect effects accordingly.We believe these modifications enhance the clarity and comprehensibility of our results. Thank you once again for your insightful suggestions.

Thank you once again for your positive feedback and for recognizing the efforts we have put into this paper. We appreciate your constructive comments and have made the necessary revisions to address the issues you highlighted. We hope these modifications meet your expectations and further strengthen the manuscript. If there are any more aspects of the manuscript that require clarification or additional revision, please let us know. We are committed to making the necessary adjustments until our work meets both your standards and the publication requirements of the journal.

 

Sincerely,

The Authors of Manuscript 2986775

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

I am glad that you followed my comments, and I am so happy to see a much stronger version of your paper.

Congratulations on your good work!