Cultural Identity in Bicultural Young Adults in Ireland: A Social Representation Theory Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

As I understand manuscript explores immigrants’ social representations of particular identities and immigrants’ practices which is very interesting. However, the manuscript needs to be significantly revised, especially, the theoretical part. Only after major revision is it possible to consider it for publication.

The goal of the paper is not clear from the abstract. It needs to be revised to make the manuscript’s objectives more salient.

Authors use Berry’s acculturation theory, but their theoretical base is outdated. I suggest them to consider more recent literature on acculturation. And, also address recent significant critiques of the acculturation approach. The latter task is especially significant as the authors use the concept of social representations, however, social representation theory’s relation to acculturation theories is very questionable, whereas it has been actively used by proculturation researchers recently who focus on individual-level analysis and qualitative research that seems more relevant to author’s approach.

Inspired by Berry’s outdated references authors consider the question of multiple identities. While talking about multiple identities authors tend to represent them as static entities that contradict the common sense and developmental nature of humans. So, I suggest authors to represent it more dynamically and assume the possibility of hybridisation and mixture. Addressing the theory of Proculturation would help them in the theorisation of identities more dynamically and developmentally.

I strongly suggest to look into Sunnil Bhatia’s, Lado Gamsakhurdia’s and Floyd Rudmin’s publications on acculturation-related discussions.

 Empirical data results are not connected with the theoretical part of the paper that is an issue. Also, I suggest adding “conclusions’ that are absent in the current form of the manuscript.

 Concerning methods - It is not serious to provide percentages during such a small-scale qualitative research.

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the comments to the submitted manuscript. As advised, below are the notes to the reviewer:

1. "The goal of the paper is not clear from the abstract. It needs to be revised to make the manuscript’s objectives more salient."

Authors: We have revised the abstract and made it more reflective of the outcomes of the research. 

2. "Authors use Berry’s acculturation theory, but their theoretical base is outdated. I suggest them to consider more recent literature on acculturation. And, also address recent significant critiques of the acculturation approach. "

Authors: We have addressed this comment and incorporated more up-to-date research regarding acculturation, and the critiques as to the rigid nature of previous knowledge. 

3. "The latter task is especially significant as the authors use the concept of social representations, however, social representation theory’s relation to acculturation theories is very questionable, whereas it has been actively used by proculturation researchers recently who focus on individual-level analysis and qualitative research that seems more relevant to author’s approach."

Authors: The Authors have taken this comment into account and incorporated the theory of procutlturation into the research to guide the more subjective experiences of the participants and connect it to SRT. Likewise, we used it to explore a more multi-dimensional and hybrid understandings of the data. 

4.  "Empirical data results are not connected with the theoretical part of the paper that is an issue. "

Author: This issue was examined and the connection to the theory was better expressed and evident in the results. 

 

5. 'I suggest adding “conclusions’ that are absent in the current form of the manuscript.'

Author: Conclusion was added to the manuscript.

6. "It is not serious to provide percentages during such a small-scale qualitative research."

Authors: Percentages were removed. 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Even when I do not consider myself an expert on the subject matter, the work has seemed to me of a very high interest. The construction and negotiation of identities is in our current society one of the fundamental issues for social coexistence and the elimination of economic, social and cultural inequalities. The work is based on a deep knowledge of the problem, a clear and coherent approach, an adequate methodology and useful and adequate results at a social level.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 

Thank you for the comments. 

The research has been revised based on comments made from you and reviewer 1. 

Best wishes, 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for addressing my comments and suggestions. Goals and conclusions are provided more adequately and the structure of the manuscript has been improved. I believe the author's position is represented clearly and in a proper way accompanied by adequate theoretical framing and review now and could be published in the current form.