The Relationships between Participation Motivation and Continuous Participation Intention: Mediating Effect of Sports Commitment among University Futsal Club Participants
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear author,
It is an honor for me to review the paper titled “The Relationships between Participation Motivation and Continuous Participation Intention: Mediating Effect of Sports Commitment among University Futsal Club Participants”
His paper addresses an interesting subject but has deficiencies that must be modified in order to be published.
Firstly, the abstract has to be reworked. It must reflect the introduction, the aim, the method used and the sample, as well as the main results and conclusions.
Also, the keywords are not correct. I suggest you use a thesaurus like ERIC.
As for the introduction, it does not delve into the state of the art about the constructs analyzed in the study. I recommend that you include several paragraphs where you delve into the literature on them.
On the other hand, the references used are highly obsolete. You should include 10-12 references from the last two years to compensate for the high rate of obsolescence. Remember that the current state of the question must be, as I refer, current.
Regarding the method, the sample must be defined, describing the sociodemographic features that characterize it and reflecting the assumed sampling error. None of this is reflected in his paper.
Regarding the instruments, the psychometric properties are not studied in depth. They reflect the factors that make up the scales, their original validity and reliability, and those obtained in the study.
In the method, a procedure section must be included. In it, explain how the research was developed and the ethical code followed in it.
The first section of the results, that is, "Demographic characteristics of the subjects" must be removed from this heading and included in the method participants section.
In the discussion, lines 422 to 426 are redundant. Eliminate them, as they do not provide any new relevant data.
Author Response
Thank you for the review on the thesis.
I tried to reflect the contents of the review as much as possible in the thesis.
If there is something to be improved, please comment.
thank you.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
1. The abstract is too superficial, it should be corrected so that it gives a lot of insight into the author's work. The aim of the study and the methodology are not specified in the summary.
2. Literature Review needs to be enriched, it is too poor.
3. Organize your bibliography (e.g. first name initials must follow the surname)
4. Since the article is intended for the Sustainable section, reference should be made to sustainable management in the text. What is the relationship between the research of the author of the article and its results with sustainable management. This has not been clearly stated, only in Conclusion the author indirectly refers to sustainable management.
5. Please justify why qualitative research was not chosen. Qualitative research allows to obtain broader and deeper information from respondents, including those that the researcher did not plan to obtain, which is their undoubted advantage. They allow you to answer the questions "how?", "what?", "why?", while quantitative ones allow you to answer the question "how much?".
Author Response
Thank you for the review on the thesis.
I tried to reflect the contents of the review as much as possible in the thesis.
If there is something to be improved, please comment.
thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for taking my corrections into account and I hope I have contributed to the quality of your article.
Author Response
Thanks to the reviewer for commenting.
Thanks to you, the thesis is better.
thank you
