Optimizing the Development of Space-Temporal Orientation in Physical Education and Sports Lessons for Students Aged 8–11 Years
and Bogdan Almăjan-GuțăRound 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
I consider that the purpose of the study is very interesting and could bring very relevant knowledge to the field. However, there are some issues that need to be improved.
First of all, the introduction is scarce. More references are needed in order to contextualize the study more deeply.
Regarding the methodology, I would like to add some details to be improved:
- The tables should be adapted to APA7 standards.
- With a nonparametric sample, an ANOVA test cannot be used. In this case, a Kruskal-Wallis analysis should be used as an alternative.
- The same with correlations, in case of nonparametric variables, the chi-square test should be used.
- Regarding linear regression, the same as with the two previous ones. Since this is a sample that does not follow the normal distribution, the appropriate tests for this type of sample should be used. Such as non-parametric regression or logistic regression.
- In this section, the function of the tests is not clear; a slightly more detailed explanation would be required to improve understanding. In addition, the level of significance used should be added.
Regarding the tables of the results, information is included that does not provide relevant information and makes them difficult to understand. I suggest simplifying the tables with the necessary and relevant information for the study.
Finally, the discussion is well structured, but could be completed by pointing out the limitations found in the study.
Kind regards,
Author Response
Answer to Reviewer 1
Hello,
Following the reply received, the authors would like to thank you for your appreciation and comments, with which we have made considerable improvements to the study. In the hope that we have not omitted any details, we present below the changes made:
- The introduction part has been improved by adding some additional and interesting information related to spatial-temporal orientation. These have been taken from 17 extra studies published in the last 5 years.
- Regarding the methodology, the format of all tables has been modified and adapted to APA7 standards. We also deleted additional tables that did not provide relevant information on the results side. The abstract has been modified by adding the level of significance used.
- We improved the discussion by highlighting some limitations that might mark the study.
- Regarding the research hypotheses, we chose to keep only two of them, for two reasons:
-their results were considered relevant to the field
-we were able to respect the requirements related to the number of pages accepted in the journal.
- At the same time, we request permission for the statistical analysis to be accepted, given the choice of sample, namely:
-the children included in the sample numbered 148 (>30), therefore the analysis of normality of distribution could be not relevant
-the sample was chosen by convenience, made up of the school population, which could be representative of the population.
The authors thank you once again for your appreciation and for highlighting details that needed improvement.
Reviewer 2 Report
Many thanks to the editors of the journal for considering me for the review of this paper. Thanks to the authors for the time they have dedicated to this interesting paper. I consider that the subject matter of this work is very necessary for its study and development. The following are a series of questions that I would like to contribute from a critical point of view for the improvement of the work if the authors are willing to do so.
Regarding the work, we begin with the summary in which it is recommended that the statistical tests used to be indicated.
In the introduction, the variables of the study are presented in detail, and a review of studies in the line of each variable is made. It is true that throughout the introduction only 9 references are used, which is considered scarce. They should be greatly increased, mainly with studies carried out in the last 5 years. Studies such as the one indicated can help the authors:
Posso-Pacheco, R. J.; Ortiz-Bravo, N. A.; Paz-Viteri, B. S.; Marcillo-Ñacato, J.; Arufe-Giráldez,V. (2022). Análisis de la influencia de un programa estructurado de Educación Física sobre la coordinación motriz y autoestima en niños de 6 y 7 años. Journal of Sport and Health Research. 14(1): 123-134.
https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/JSHR/article/view/86055
Regarding the introduction, the objective cannot be clearly seen. It needs to appear clearly and unequivocally.
Regarding the methodology, they should consider the type of sampling in the participant's section. The instruments are well defined although the "Piaget Head Space-temporal Orientation Test" should be further described.
The results are well organized but since the hypotheses and objectives have not been clearly listed above, the reader gets lost at this point and the results are not clearly understood.
The tables do not follow journal guidelines. Likewise, there are too many tables accompanied by a few figures. The authors should highlight only those that they consider providing the most significant results of the study.
The discussion starts with the general objective and that is fine. However, given that the results are too extensive, the discussion is also somewhat lengthy and even then, it does not address the discussion of all the results. It is likely that those results are not the most significant.
The conclusions are clear, but they must go beyond the instruments and tests. In addition, they must respond to all the objectives. This is not the case.
It is considered that with the indicated revisions the work could be accepted for potential publication.
Author Response
Answer to Reviewer 2
Hello,
Following the reply received, the authors would like to thank you for your appreciation and comments, with which we have made considerable improvements to the study. In the hope that we have not omitted any details, we present below the changes made:
- The abstract has been modified by adding the results to each hypothesis tested.
- The introduction part has been improved by adding additional and interesting information related to spatio-temporal orientation. These have been taken from 17 extra studies published in the last 5 years. On this way, we would like to thank for the recommendation of the study ,,Análisis de la influencia de un programa estructurado de Educación Física sobre la coordinación motriz y autoestima en niños de 6 y 7 años'' (Posso-Pacheco et. al, 2022). Relevant information was found that was helpful in structuring the article.
- The objective of the study, as well as the hypotheses, have been added to point 2 (Materials and methods), for a better understanding of the topic.
- We have added the way in which the sample was chosen in point 2 (Materials and methods).
- Regarding the methodology, we modified the format of all tables and adapted it to APA7 standards. We also deleted additional tables that did not provide relevant information on the results side.
- We opted to keep two hypotheses because the results were considered more relevant to the field. Therefore, part of the discussion was removed.
The authors thank you again for your appreciation and highlighting details that needed improvement.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
First of all, I would like to thank you for your involvement in the adaptation of the manuscript.
With all the corrections noted above, the only thing that remains to be done is the statistical analysis. It is true that the sample may not be parametric for different reasons, so in this case, any information on this fact should be omitted so that there are no methodological contradictions. Nowhere in the document should it appear that the sample does not follow a normal distribution. In reviewing the entire document again, I do not find the mention of normality of the sample and I see all the proposed changes made.
Kind regards,
