No

Comments

Responds

1.        

The responses (206) are a small fraction of the sample of participats (1500 respondents). The authors should provide an analysis of why the sample of participants is representative of the original sample. Otherwise, there is room to assume that a certain category of people may have provided their responses (e.g. only the younger responses, or any other group).

Thank you, reviewer 1

We have provided a better explanation regarding the participants in 3.1 as suggested by reviewer 1.

2.        

The authors state that "The measures of all constructs in this study were adapted from previously validated scale and items", and go on to explain the sources for each section of the questionnaire. However, there is no indication of what changes were made to the original questions. Moreover there are no sample items for each scale, so that the reader may understand how each construct was measured. Finally, the scales were not provided (Likert scales with what kind of text field for each number value 1-7 for each scale?). All this would be resolved, if the authors provide the questionnaire along with the measurement scales for each construct, in an Appendix or table.

Thank you, reviewer 1

We have provided the list of items (original and modified) for each construct in Appendix A.

3.        

In Table 1 , we see that SM platforms usage is mainly in WhatsApp and not any of the rest of the platforms. However, WhatsApp is more of a messaging service than a social media service. Hence, if the participants in the study mainly used WhatsApp, the hypothesis that social media usage is at play here doesn't look right. Perhaps "Social messaging" usage may be more appropriate for the authors' hypotheses. If I am mistaken in interpreting the table, the table may need clarification itself. It looks like this study is more on the effect of using WhatApp (a messaging service), than social media usage. If that is so, it may be appropriate to re-position the paper accordingly, changing also its title.

Thank you, reviewer 1

Today, WhatsApp allows users to have a profile, timeline posts (WhatsApp stories), share statuses, and freely exchange video, audio, text, and images similar to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. Besides,

WhatsApp also gives users the option of having a Mobile App, Web Version, or Desktop App. These show that WhatsApp is a social media.

We believe WhatsApp is also part of social media according to a definition by Obar and Wildman (2015), the definition of social media presented in the literature and the following commonalities among current social media services are: 1) Social media services are currently (currently) Web 2.0 Internet-based application, 2) User generated content is the lifeblood  of social media, 3) Individual and group creator user-specific profile for a sit or app designed and maintained by a social media services 4) Social media services facilitate the development of  social network online by connecting a profile with those of other individuals or/and groups.

4.        

The explanation of the statistical results look a bit strange to me (see page 10 for example). In my understanding, R-squared values range from 0 to 1 and are commonly stated as percentages from 0% to 100%. An R-squared of 100% means that all movements of a security (or another dependent variable) are completely explained by movements in the index (or the independent variable(s) you are interested in). Therefore, I would expect that R2 = 0.343 over technostress in the figure would mean that Information overload, communication overload, and social overload, jointly explain 34.3% of the variance in technostress. However, the authors explain this very differently both in numbers, as well as in essence in the paragraph before Figure 3. The same stands for all other numbers in the figure. Therefore, if my view is correct, the results are not explained correctly by the authors. Moreover, it may seem that SM use at work only explains a small percent of the social overload of employees (2.7%), communication overload (4.7%), and information overload (5.5%). Moreover, technostress seems to explain a fraction of the variance in innovative performance (0.4%). Therefore, what I make of the results is that the only strong relationship validated is that Info/Comms/Social overload jointly explain a significant percentage in the variance in technostress. Please review your results according to the above and adjust as needed their discussion and your conclusions.

Thank you, reviewer 1

We have addressed all the comments and amended accordingly.

No

Comments

Responds

1.        

 First, I would suggest the authors to avoid abbreviate social media as SM. It will help to improve the readability of the manuscript.

2.        

There is a need for a stronger conceptualization of what is social media in the Introduction. Given that many of the participants use Whatsapp (88%) as their social media, it may not be the same social media like Facebook or Twitters. Perhaps, more justification is necessary regarding what is constituted social media in the current study and how it may lead to stress and overload. 

Thank you, reviewer 2

We have provided a better explanation in 1.0 Introduction (first paragraph) as the following:

Social media (SM) has countless users worldwide, and the number is constantly growing, and the definition of SM varies (Lee & Lee, 2020). According to Obar and Wildman (2015), the definition of SM presented in the literature and the following commonalities among current social media services are: 1) Social media services are currently (currently) Web 2.0 Internet-based application, 2) User generated content is the lifeblood  of social media, 3) Individual and group creator user-specific profile for a sit or app designed and maintained by a social media services 4) Social media services facilitate the development of  social network online by connecting a profile with those of other individuals or/and groups. SM functionalities are not only traditionally designed for social networking purposes but have been widely used for business and work purposes. Hence, many available social media platforms are widely used by organizations for their official purposes, including Facebook, WeChat, DingTalk, WhatsApp, Twitter, Blogs, YouTube, and Photo-sharing sites (Pavithra & Deepak, 2020; Song et al., 2019).

3.        

 It will be important for the authors to elaborate further how the quota sampling was conducted. Also, there is a need to supplement more information regarding the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sampling.

Thank you, reviewer 2

As suggested by reviewer 2, we have provided a better explanation regarding the quota sampling in 3.1.

We have added new subtopic 3.2 for the information regarding the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the sampling.

4.        

There is a need to mention how many missing data and how these missing data were treated in the current study.

Relevant paper:

Newman, D. A. (2014). Missing data: Five practical guidelines. Organizational Research Methods, 17(4), 372-411.

Thank you, reviewer 2

We have amended accordingly by adding a new subtopic, 4.1 data preparation, to explain missing data.

5.        

One limitation that I hope the authors can elaborate and discuss in their discussion is the possibility of reverse causation in the relationship between social media and stress. Given the use of cross-sectional design, it is still possible that stress is not a consequence but antecedent of social media use. This issue should be discussed and acknowledged and will help to provide a balanced perspective in this topic. See the following paper that will be relevant and helpful to the discussion:Does social media use increase depressive symptoms? A reverse causation perspective. (2021). Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 641934.

Thank you, reviewer 2

We have provided a better explanation in 7.0 Limitation and future work (last paragraph) as the following:

Lastly, future scholars should consider conducting a cross-sectional or longitudinal study by reversing causation in the relationship between social media and stress, especially in the workplace setting. This study has focused on the roles of SM toward technostress issues by discussing the consequences of SM use at work. To gain a clear picture of the SM-technostress link, the direction of social media causing psychological well-being problems might instead be reversed. As Hartanto et al. (2021) mentioned that future research needs to move toward a deeper analysis of the reverse possibility underlying social media use.

No

Comments

Responds

1.        

This is the objective of the study?..

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have amended this issue.

2.        

Please stated the gap and inconsistency first before this sentence. I did not see the gap of research.... I suggest to add issue and gap of research.

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have amended by adding issues and gap of research in the abstract.

3.        

 Do you mean this employee for all sectors in Malaysia?.... better you stated 206 (goverment of non goverment sectors?...) employees

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have amended accordingly.

206 Malaysian employees from the government sector and government-linked companies (GLC) participated……….

4.        

Please add a conclusion after the result and policy implications.

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have provided a better explanation as the following:

…..This study provides theoretical and practical implications for extending the knowledge and provide mitigating plans and effort to resolve employees' performance at work. Therefore, this study fills the dearth of research pertaining to the roles of SM use at work on employees' innovative job performance.

5.        

Innovative Job Performance, please make it consistent the whole content of manuscript....

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have amended accordingly.

6.        

Highlight what the previous studies have done and what do you do in the current study.....

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have provided the following justifications:

Despite the existing body of knowledge, our understanding of SM overload is still constrained by some persisting gaps in the SM literature. The potential work-related consequences of SM stressors, especially in job performance, have remained understudied(Cho et al., 2019; Yu et al., 2018). Most prior studies on SM overload have been concentrated more on SM users generally (Cao et al., 2020; Dai et al., 2020; Fu et al., 2020), students (Guo et al., 2020; Islam et al., 2020) compared to the employees. Furthermore, studies on the different dimensions of overload remain scarce (Fu et al., 2020). Besides, in the context of SM, technostress associated with SM use has been studied primarily through the consequences of behavioural and psychological response (Bucher et al., 2013; Luqman et al., 2017; Maier, Laumer, Eckhardt, et al., 2015; Salo et al., 2019), and little attention to date focuses on the potential work-related outcomes such as job performance. Thus, this study provides a detailed process on how the association between SM use at work and SM overload can induce employees' psychological strain that interferes with employee's innovative job performance.

7.        

2. Literature Review

2.1 Underpinning Theory

2.1.1 xxxx

2.1.2 xxx

2.1.3 xxx

2.2 xxx

2.3 xxxx

 and so on....

2.2 Hypothesis development

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have renamed this section as suggested by reviewer 3.

8.        

Move to below figure caption and add Source:

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have amended accordingly in Figure 1.

9.        

Please writes the additional sentences to link both paragraphs

The interconnection of the

different SM overloads on employees' job performance remains limited.

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have provided the following justifications:

The interconnection of the different SM overloads on employees' job performance remains limited. Therefore, this study offers a significant extension of social media overload consisting of communication overload, information overload and social overload as representative stressors in understanding the psychological mechanisms underlying technostress on employees' innovative job performance.

10.     

Who said and year...

Pervasiveness SM usage has integrated in employees’ social life, socialization

and networking via SM within the organization.

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have cited the sentence as stated below:

Pervasiveness SM usage has integrated in employees’ social life, socialization and networking via SM within the organization (Song et al., 2019; Yang, 2020).

11.     

Do you mean this is a research framework...

Conceptual Framework?.....

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have renamed the framework.

12.     

You can provide this information in Table

Also, stated unit analysis and its measurement

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have amended accordingly by creating a new table for the list of the construct with the number of items and sources.

13.     

Descriptive statistics Right?.... You cannot run this by SmartPLS... means you have another statistical analysis besides SEM-PLS. please write up in methodology section

Thank you, reviewer 3

In the subtopic 3.5, we have provided the following justifications:

The data analysis began with the descriptive statistic, and this study performed SPSS version 22 to measure the frequency of background characteristics. Besides, this study applies the PLS-SEM approach……

14.     

Change in the form of Table and the caption is

Table 4: The result of the coefficient determination (R Square), Effect Size (f Square), predictive relevance (Q Square), and Impact of predictive relevance (q square).

You need to report and elaborate first about "coefficient determination (R Square), Effect Size (f Square), predictive relevance (Q Square) and Impact of predictive relevance (q square)." and threshold...

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have amended accordingly by creating a new table, Table 7 to report R², f², Q² .

15.     

Discuss the result first and link it with findings of previous works

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have addressed all the comments and amended accordingly.

16.     

Research Implication can move and combine with section

6 Conclusion

6.1 Research Implication

6.2. Limitation and Future research

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have amended accordingly.

17.     

Please revise the content of this section and follow your RQ and RO.

Thank you, reviewer 3

We have amended accordingly.