Correlative Study between Personality Traits, Student Mental Skills and Educational Outcomes

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I would suggest enriching the conclusions a little, even if that is already fine.

Author Response

 

12/03/2021

Dear Editors & reviewers

We ask you to accept our original article corrections entitled:

“Correlative study between personality traits, student mental skills and educational outcomes“

Please find attached the changes made by quoting the lines to facilitate the task for editors and reviewers:

• 125 to 127; 162 to 164; 193 to 195; 227 to 229, these lines concern a cut-off value for our correlation coefficients in the text;
• 188; 156; 223; 243, these lines concern a cut-off value for our correlation coefficients in board;
• 293 and 294, these two lines mentioned the limits of size and type of our sample;
• 343 and 344, a small correction in the numbering of bibliographic references;
• 358 to 361, we explain limits of using a non-validated measuring instrument;
• 385 to 393, these lines are for enriching the conclusion;
• 428, we added a bibliographic resource for the conclusion section and limits of using a non-validated measuring instrument;

We look forward to the opportunity to hear from you further. Thank for Your time and consideration

Kind regards,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have performed a valuable study that determines the correlations between personality traits, academic mental skills and educational outcomes. Although the study could be interesting, there are important limitations that has not been discussed or indicated as proposals to increase the impact of the study in the conclusions section. I highly suggest the authors to address the following issues and including them not only in the methodological section, but also addressing their limitations in the discussion or conclusion section of the manuscript.

1 - 695 students from only two institutions participated in the study. I am aware of the difficulties of conducting this type of educational research with random sampling methods, but I have not seen any reference addressing the limitation in the type of sampling (non-probabilistic) and the sample size. Although 695 students is not a short sample, it can't be considered as large either. 

2 - Authors designed a scale (Scale measuring academic mental skills). Using a scale that has not been previously validated, tested and retested and its reliability has not been analyzed in depth is a great limitation in the study.

3 - I don't see authors have set a cut-off value for their correlation coefficients. They just look for significant correlations. Several authors have discussed that not only is necessary that the correlation is significant, but also a certain cut-off value must be established.

Meng, X. L., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Comparing correlated correlation coefficients. Psychological bulletin, 111(1), 172.

Parsons, S., Kruijt, A. W., & Fox, E. (2019). Psychological science needs a standard practice of reporting the reliability of cognitive-behavioral measurements. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2(4), 378-395.

 

Author Response

 

12/03/2021

Dear Editors & reviewers

We ask you to accept our original article corrections entitled:

“Correlative study between personality traits, student mental skills and educational outcomes“

Please find attached the changes made by quoting the lines to facilitate the task for editors and reviewers:

• 125 to 127; 162 to 164; 193 to 195; 227 to 229, these lines concern a cut-off value for our correlation coefficients in the text;
• 188; 156; 223; 243, these lines concern a cut-off value for our correlation coefficients in board;
• 293 and 294, these two lines mentioned the limits of size and type of our sample;
• (343 and 344), a small correction in the numbering of bibliographic references;
• (358 to 361), we explain limits of using a non-validated measuring instrument;
• (385 to 393), these lines are for enriching the conclusion;
• 428, we added a bibliographic resource for the conclusion section and limits of using a non-validated measuring instrument;

We look forward to the opportunity to hear from you further. Thank for Your time and consideration

Kind regards,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf