Peer Review History
| Original SubmissionFebruary 9, 2020 |
|---|
|
PONE-D-20-03549 Psychological symptoms and emotion regulation strategies among the unemployed person in Korea: a latent profile analysis PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Kim, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by May 03 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:
Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Silvia Cimino Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: 1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.
Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. * In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts: a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Partly Reviewer #2: Yes ********** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ********** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ********** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ********** 5. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: Thank you very much for the possibility to review the manuscript titled “Psychological symptoms and emotion regulation strategies among the unemployed person in Korea: a latent profile analysis”. The paper is well written and the results are clearly supported by a robust methodology. I read the article with interest and I think it can add to previous literature and be published in this Journal, but it needs some revisions. Please find below some comments. INTRODUCTION The introduction is very rich and examines the results of the previous literature for the constructs under examination. However, the introduction is structured in a somewhat confusing way and does not guide the reader through the topic. In particular, after discussing the phenomenon of unemployment from a social point of view, highlighting the prevalence rates in Korea, the authors discuss suicide rates and then go on to discuss the effects on the whole household. In this respect, before going into the specifics of suicide rates, it would be useful to introduce the fact that unemployment has a major impact on mental health and quality of life in general, and then go into the specifics. In particular, the study aimed to examine the strategies of emotional regulation, in a group of unemployed young people, and how these are associated with a series of psychopathological symptoms (in particular, depression, somatization, anxiety, and anger). However, In the description of the previous literature, the authors often discuss general studies on the relationship between specific constructs and then move on to specific studies on unemployed populations, and so on. Often, for each of these paragraphs, it is specified what the present study intends to verify in several places in the text. Although the introduction goes into the various constructs adequately, with this organization the reader may feel confused. I suggest that we reorganize the introduction by initially reporting the studies that have shown significant associations between unemployment status and the psychopathological symptoms under examination. Then, discuss the results of the studies that analyzed the associations between psychopathological symptoms and emotional regulation strategies, and then move on to the description of the field studies specific to the unemployed population. Therefore, only at the end (in the subsection of The Present study) resuming the aims of the study, based on the previous literature which should be cited again to support the hypotheses of the study. Furthermore, given that the population under examination are young adults, it would be useful to specify the role played by family support and the evolutionary tasks related to the construction of identity and autonomy in this specific evolutionary phase and from which theoretical perspective. Also, among the negative effects associated with unemployment, recent studies have highlighted the presence of an increased risk of developing Internet Addiction, which in turn other studies have shown may be a strategy to cope with psychological sufferance. In this regard, see and cite the studies by Kim et al. (2017). Poor sleep quality and suicide attempt among adults with internet addiction: A nationwide community sample of Korea. PloS one, 12(4); Ballarotto et al. (2018). Adolescent Internet abuse: A study on the role of attachment to parents and peers in a large community sample. BioMed research international, 2018; Cimino, S., & Cerniglia, L. (2018). A longitudinal study for the empirical validation of an etiopathogenetic model of internet addiction in adolescence based on early emotion regulation. BioMed research international, 2018. Furthermore, recent literature has shown that the relationship between psychopathological symptoms and emotional regulation strategies is complex and bidirectional. See, for example, the study by Schäfer et al. (2017). Emotion regulation strategies in depressive and anxiety symptoms in youth: A meta-analytic review. Journal of youth and adolescence, 46(2), 261-276; the study by Aldao, A., & Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2012). When are adaptive strategies most predictive of psychopathology?. Journal of abnormal psychology, 121(1), 276; and the study by Porreca, et al., (2018). Emotional availability, neuropsychological functioning, and psychopathology: The context of parental substance use disorder. BioMed research international, 2018. Furthermore, in some points, I suggest to clarify more clearly what the previous literature said. For example, authors write that “Previous studies[38, 41] have investigated the relationship between emotion regulation strategies and negative emotions, emotional disorders, and psychopathology”, describing the regulatory strategies that have emerged but do not report the results related to the associations that have emerged between these constructs. In other points, the authors refer to previous studies, but without mentioning them. For example, "First, the research on unemployed people is still focused on examining the relationship between emotion regulation strategies and psychological symptoms, and the number of studies is very limited." What studies? What did they find? In many places in the text, the authors refer to "previous studies", "some studies", but without explicitly citing them. These should be cited every time they are mentioned. In the same way, I suggest citing bibliographic sources referring to the difference between the variable-centered approach and person-centered approach. Moreover, since the sample is composed of predominantly female subjects, it is important to highlight gender-related differences in psychopathological symptomatology and emotional regulation strategies. The last line of the introduction ( “The model of this study is as follows”) is written with a font size smaller than the rest of the text. METHODS AND DISCUSSION In the subsection “Participants and procedure” the authors wrote the percentage of participants who had more than 2 years of jobless experience was high. what is this percentage? What were the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of subjects? In the last line of this subsection, the authors wrote in red that they received a consent form for all participants. Why in red? In which form did you obtain consent? Written? Oral? The emotion regulation strategy questionnaire(ERSQ) is a self-report? Is there a Likert scale? In the description of the instrument authors wrote that “Maladaptive strategies showed significant positive correlation with psychopathology such as depression, while other strategies showed negative correlation” and that “This study classified latent profiles according to emotional regulation strategies of unemployed people based on ERSQ scale, which measures various emotional regulation strategies”. I suggest to delete these parts or move them respectively in the introductions (citing the literature) and in the description of the procedure, but not in the description of the instrument. Moreover, the authors did not report the reliability of ERSQ scales for this study. In Table 1 there are some typing errors: “attetion distractive strategies” should be “attention”; “state angger” and “ trait angger” should be anger. Among the socio-demographic variables (age, job seeking Months) why did you not consider the role played by the gender, considering that 75.9% of the sample is female? I suggest to do it. As suggested above, Also in the discussions, it is important to report the studies of recent literature that have shown a bidirectional effect between psychopathological symptoms and emotional regulation strategies. In addition, in many points of the discussions there is a lack of sources in the previous literature on which the discussions of some results are based, for example, “This is consistent with the results of previous studies”, “Unlike previous studies”, “This is in line with findings from previous studies” etc. What previous studies? They should always be cited. Reviewer #2: Thank you very much for the possibility to review the article titled "Psychological symptoms and emotion regulation strategies among the unemployed person in Korea: a latent profile analysis". This study is very interesting and I believe that it can be published if the authors make few revisions. Specifically, the Introduction is very broad and it would be useful that in the section "The present study", the authors explain more clearly the hypotheses underlying the present study, in line with the literature. Furthermore, there are many typing errors in the text (such as at the beginning of page 9 or on page 12 "the emotionr egulation", etc.). Authors are invited to completely revise the text. In addition, the numbering of references should follow their appearance in the text. Authors are therefore invited to completely revise the numbering of references. ********** 6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: No Reviewer #2: No [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. |
| Revision 1 |
|
Psychiatric symptoms and emotion regulation strategies among the unemployed people in Korea: a latent profile analysis PONE-D-20-03549R1 Dear Authors, We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication. An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. Kind regards, Silvia Cimino Academic Editor PLOS ONE |
| Formally Accepted |
|
PONE-D-20-03549R1 Psychiatric symptoms and emotion regulation strategies among the unemployed people in Korea: a latent profile analysis Dear Dr. Kim: I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org. If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Professor Silvia Cimino Academic Editor PLOS ONE |
Open letter on the publication of peer review reports
PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.
We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.
Learn more at ASAPbio .