2024年4月13日发(作者：)

专家评审意见整改回复范文

英文回答：

The expert review comments for the manuscript titled

"Influences of [variables/factors] on [dependent variable]"

have been carefully reviewed and addressed in this revised

version. The following is a detailed response to each

comment:

Comment 1: Clarity of the Research Questions.

The expert reviewers suggested that the research

questions should be clearly stated and aligned with the

objectives of the study.

Response: The research questions have been revised to

ensure clarity and alignment with the study objectives.

They now explicitly outline the specific aspects of the

[dependent variable] that will be examined in relation to

the independent [variables/factors].

Comment 2: Inclusion of Relevant Literature.

The reviewers highlighted the need for a more

comprehensive literature review to support the claims made

in the manuscript.

Response: The literature review has been expanded to

include additional relevant studies and theoretical

perspectives. This has strengthened the theoretical

foundation of the study and provides a more robust context

for the research questions.

Comment 3: Data Analysis and Interpretation.

The expert reviewers raised concerns about the

appropriateness of the data analysis methods and the

interpretation of the results.

Response: The data analysis methods have been

thoroughly reviewed and revised to ensure they are

appropriate for the type of data collected. Additionally,

the interpretation of the results has been refined to

provide a more nuanced and balanced presentation of the

findings.

Comment 4: Discussion of Limitations and Future

Research.

The reviewers recommended including a discussion of

the limitations of the study and suggestions for future

research directions.

Response: A section has been added to the manuscript

that acknowledges the limitations of the current study and

proposes specific areas for future research. This

demonstrates an awareness of the study's limitations and a

commitment to advancing the research agenda.

Comment 5: Writing Style and Language.

The expert reviewers provided suggestions for

improving the overall writing style and language of the

manuscript.

Response: The manuscript has been carefully edited to

improve clarity, conciseness, and grammatical accuracy. The

use of technical jargon has been minimized to ensure

accessibility to a wider audience.

Comment 6: Ethical Considerations.

The reviewers mentioned the need to ensure that the

study adheres to ethical guidelines and respects the rights

of participants.

Response: The manuscript has been revised to include a

statement confirming that the study was conducted in

accordance with ethical principles. This includes obtaining

informed consent from all participants and protecting their

privacy and confidentiality.

In summary, the expert review comments have been taken

seriously and have resulted in significant improvements to

the manuscript. The revised version now addresses the

concerns raised by the reviewers and presents a more robust,

well-written, and ethically sound study.

中文回答：

专家评审意见整改回复。

针对“【变量/因素】对【因变量】的影响”的论文，已仔细审

阅专家评审意见并进行了整改，以下是针对每条意见的详细回复：

意见 1，研究问题的清晰性。

专家评审人员建议明确陈述研究问题，并与研究目标保持一致。

回复，已修改研究问题以确保清晰性，并与研究目标保持一致。

现在，它们明确概述了将要检查的【因变量】的具体方面，以及与

【变量/因素】的关系。

意见 2，相关文献纳入。

评审人员强调需要更全面的文献综述来支持论文中的主张。

回复，已扩展文献综述以纳入其他相关研究和理论观点。这加

强了研究的理论基础，并为研究问题提供了一个更稳健的背景。

意见 3，数据分析和解释。

专家评审人员对数据分析方法的适当性以及结果解释提出了担

忧。

回复，已彻底审查并修改数据分析方法，以确保它们适合所收

集的数据类型。此外，已经完善了对结果的解释，以更细致和平衡

地呈现研究结果。

意见 4，对局限性和未来研究的讨论。

评审人员建议纳入对研究局限性的讨论以及未来研究方向的建

议。

回复， 已在论文中增加了一个部分，既承认了当前研究的局

限性，也提出了未来研究的具体方向。这表明了意识到研究的局限

性，并致力于推进研究议程。

意见 5，写作风格和语言。

专家评审人员对论文的整体写作风格和语言提出了改进建议。

回复，对论文进行了仔细编辑，以提高清晰度、简洁性和语法

准确性。尽量减少使用专业术语，以确保更广泛受众的理解。

意见 6，伦理考量。

评审人员提到需要确保研究遵循伦理准则并尊重参与者的权利。

回复，已修改论文，包含一份声明，确认研究是在符合伦理原

则的情况下进行的。这包括征得所有参与者的知情同意，并保护他

们的隐私和机密。

总之，专家评审意见已得到认真对待，并对论文进行了重大改

进。修改后的版本现在解决了评审人员提出的问题，并展示了一项

更稳健、撰写更精良、更符合伦理的研究。