Satisfaction and continuance intention of blended learning from perspective of junior high school students in the directly-entering-socialism ethnic communities of China

Chunyu Li; Thanawan Phongsatha

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0270939

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJune 19, 2022
29 Aug 2022 Decision Letter - Mudassir Khan, Editor PONE-D-22-16934Satisfaction and continuance intention of blended learning from perspective of junior high school students in the directly-entering-socialism ethnic communities of ChinaPLOS ONE Dear Authors 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. ACADEMIC EDITOR:Comments to Author:The authors are required to submit the revision. Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 13 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're 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. Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Dr. Mudassir Khan, Ph.D Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 1. 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 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. PLOS ONE does not copy edit accepted manuscripts (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/criteria-for-publication#loc-5). To that effect, please ensure that your submission is free of typos and grammatical errors. 3. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide. 4. Please amend either the abstract on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the abstract in the manuscript so that they are identical. 5. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 7 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table. 6. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice. Additional Editor Comments: The authors have proposed a blended learning process from perspective of junior high school students in the directly-entering-socialism ethnic communities of China. The reviewer appreciate the authors efforts. However, following comments need to be addressed: 1. In Section Previous research and research model, what is "[Error! Reference source not found.]" 2. The label of "Figure 2. Result of the Structural Model" is not properly placed. 3. In table 1, more recent papers need to be added. [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 Reviewer #3: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: 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 Reviewer #3: 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: No Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: 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: Introduction section is very short, Motivation of the work should be added in the Introduction and also challenges in the current system. proposed methodology could be represent in the scientific manner. Its good authors have provided the sufficient results however the representation of the manuscript need to be done. Latest work should be added, Update the conclusion & abstract accordingly. Rashid, E., Ansari, M. D., Gunjan, V. K., & Khan, M. (2020). Enhancement in teaching quality methodology by predicting attendance using machine learning technique. In Modern approaches in machine learning and cognitive science: a walkthrough (pp. 227-235). Springer, Cham. Sethi, K., Jaiswal, V., & Ansari, M. D. (2020). Machine learning based support system for students to select stream (subject). Recent advances in computer science and communications (Formerly: Recent patents on computer science), 13(3), 336-344. Rashid, E., Ansari, M., & Gunjan, V. K. (2022). Innovation and Entrepreneurship in the Technical Education. In ICCCE 2021 (pp. 1199-1203). Springer, Singapore. Reviewer #2: The authors have proposed a blended learning process from perspective of junior high school students in the directly-entering-socialism ethnic communities of China. The reviewer appreicate the authors efforts. However, following comments need to be addressed: 1. In Section Previous research and research model, what is "[Error! Reference source not found.]" 2. The label of "Figure 2. Result of the Structural Model" is not properly placed. 3. In table 1, more recent papers need to be added. Reviewer #3: Paper is based on survey. A satisfactory amount of data has been collected and analyzed. Results are well organized and calculated. Conclusion parts meets the objective of the research statement. References are sufficient and latest ****** 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: Yes: Dr. Mohd. Naseem Reviewer #3: 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.] 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 PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270939.r001
Revision 1
10 Oct 2022 Author Response Dear Editor, and Dear Reviewers, We would like to thank you for your comments and suggestions, which gave us a lot of help to improve the quality of manuscript. In the revised manuscript, we revised all the issues raised. In this document, we answered all the questions proposed by journal, editor and the reviewers. Comments are shown in black bold font, followed by our answer/comment in blue normal font. The major corrections/changes in the manuscript are displayed in red font and blue front. Journal Requirements: 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. Answer: Yes, we have made manuscript meet PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. What’s more, pages and line numbers were added. Abstract was modified to 288 words(not exceed 300 words). 2. PLOS ONE does not copy edit accepted manuscripts. To that effect, please ensure that your submission is free of typos and grammatical errors. Answer: Yes, we have checked the words and grammar ensuring the manuscript is free of typos and grammatical errors. 3. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide. Answer: We wish to make changes to our Data Availability statement, we will describe these changes in our cover letter. The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. 4. Please amend either the abstract on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the abstract in the manuscript so that they are identical. Answer: We have amended abstract both identical. 5. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 7 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table. Answer: We have amended the mistakes in the text. You can check it on line numbers 312 in revised manuscript with track changes. 6. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice. Answer: We have amended reference format as outlined in the ICMJE sample references as PLOS ONE requires. And we added the updated references in order as reviewers comments. Details was described as follow: For introduction part, we added four references from 6 to 9 in reference list (line number 95-99 in the text). For table1, we added fourteen references from 30 to 43 in reference list (line number 202-208 in the text). For discussion part, we added four references from 68 to 71 in reference list (line number 383-386 in the text). Additional Editor Comments: The authors have proposed a blended learning process from perspective of junior high school students in the directly-entering-socialism ethnic communities of China. The reviewer appreciate the authors efforts. However, following comments need to be addressed: 1. In Section Previous research and research model, what is "[Error! Reference source not found.]" Answer: We have amended this mistake on line number 149. It was a wrong hyperlink which displayed error in PDF file. 2. The label of "Figure 2. Result of the Structural Model" is not properly placed. Answer: We have amended this mistake on line number 333. 3. In table 1, more recent papers need to be added. Answer: We have added more recent papers. Perceived Usefulness: Almaiah et al. (2019), Alkhawaja et al. (2022). Satisfaction: Almaiah et al. (2019), Warren et al. (2020) Confirmation: Yang et al. (2022) Self-efficacy: Vermunt& Donche (2017), Yang et al. (2022) Information Quality: Almaiah et al. (2019), Alfaki et al. (2021) Continuance Intention: Li et al. (2021), Yang et al. (2022) Review Comments: Reviewer #1: Introduction section is very short, Motivation of the work should be added in the Introduction and also challenges in the current system. proposed methodology could be represent in the scientific manner. Its good authors have provided the sufficient results however the representation of the manuscript need to be done. Latest work should be added, Update the conclusion & abstract accordingly. Rashid, E., Ansari, M. D., Gunjan, V. K., & Khan, M. (2020). Enhancement in teaching quality methodology by predicting attendance using machine learning technique. In Modern approaches in machine learning and cognitive science: a walkthrough (pp. 227-235). Springer, Cham. Sethi, K., Jaiswal, V., & Ansari, M. D. (2020). Machine learning based support system for students to select stream (subject). Recent advances in computer science and communications (Formerly: Recent patents on computer science), 13(3), 336-344. Rashid, E., Ansari, M., & Gunjan, V. K. (2022). Innovation and Entrepreneurship in the Technical Education. In ICCCE 2021 (pp. 1199-1203). Springer, Singapore. Answer: We thank you for the general appreciation of our work, and specific comments and references given that help to improve our manuscript. We added the motivation of the work and challenges in the current system in the Introduction as mentioned. For the result presentation, we divided it into four parts, i.e. demographic information, reliability and validity, model fit, and hypothesis testing. For each part, we described the data of the result following a figure. And Proposed methodology was modified. We thank you for giving us the three references to review. It inspires us a lot for the further study. We read more articles and books on machine learning. We updated and added these references in the Discussion considering that the conclusion and abstract should keep objectively described focused on the research objectives after intense discussion and deep thinking. In the discussion, we think the research model will hopefully be used in machine learning to predict student satisfaction and continuance intention of blended learning with experience data. Reviewer #2: The authors have proposed a blended learning process from perspective of junior high school students in the directly-entering-socialism ethnic communities of China. The reviewer appreicate the authors efforts. However, following comments need to be addressed: 1. In Section Previous research and research model, what is "[Error! Reference source not found.]" 2. The label of "Figure 2. Result of the Structural Model" is not properly placed. 3. In table 1, more recent papers need to be added. Answer: We thank you for recognition of our efforts, and specific comments. We Revised accordingly. For "[Error! Reference source not found.]",We have amended this mistake on line number 149. It was a wrong hyperlink which displayed error in PDF file. For the label of "Figure 2", we replaced as the journal requires. For table 1, we have added more recent papers. Perceived Usefulness: Almaiah et al. (2019), Alkhawaja et al. (2022). Satisfaction: Almaiah et al. (2019), Warren et al. (2020) Confirmation: Yang et al. (2022) Self-efficacy: Vermunt& Donche (2017), Yang et al. (2022) Information Quality: Almaiah et al. (2019), Alfaki et al. (2021) Continuance Intention: Li et al. (2021), Yang et al. (2022) Reviewer #3: Paper is based on survey. A satisfactory amount of data has been collected and analyzed. Results are well organized and calculated. Conclusion parts meets the objective of the research statement. References are sufficient and latest. Answer: We thank you for the specific comments of our manuscript. Beast regards Chunyu li Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270939.r002
15 Nov 2022 Decision Letter - Mudassir Khan, Editor Satisfaction and continuance intention of blended learning from perspective of junior high school students in the directly-entering-socialism ethnic communities of China PONE-D-22-16934R1 Dear Chunyu Li, 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, Mudassir Khan, Ph.D Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Accepted Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation. Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. 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: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. 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 ****** 5. 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 ****** 6. 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: Authors have incorporated the comments and suggestion, I have no further comments. It may be accepted for publications. Reviewer #2: My concerns have been addressed in the current form of the manuscript. I would recommend to accept this manuscript. ****** 7. 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: Yes: Mohd. Naseem ******** https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270939.r003
Formally Accepted
21 Nov 2022 Acceptance Letter - Mudassir Khan, Editor PONE-D-22-16934R1 Satisfaction and continuance intention of blended learning from perspective of junior high school students in the directly-entering-socialism ethnic communities of China Dear Dr. Li: 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 Dr. Mudassir Khan Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270939.r004

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 .