Social Capital and Household Economic Welfare: Do Entrepreneurship, Financial and Digital Literacy Matter?
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Author
Thank you for the opportunity to review this article. I am very interested in the theme that you wrote. There are some of my comments, please clarify for the improvement of your article.
Introduction: In this section, you need to provide an overview of the extent to which previous researchers have studied your research theme. Next, you must review the research gap based on several previous studies. Also, describe the novelty of your research in detail.
Discussion: In this section, you must provide a critical description of the results of your research with a fresh perspective and provide new insights to the reader.
References: Need to add the last literature
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
I enjoyed reading the article very much.
Congratulations for this excellent work !
Best regards,
The reviewer
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The research topic is topical and the associated variables for the analysis ensure an own approach, based on the specificities of households in Indonesia.
To predict the limits of the selected database and to present the arguments for which the authors consider that a research with less than 400 observations, randomly selected can provide robust results, possibly to be generalized at the level of all households in Indonesia. Moreover, the authors make comparative assessments of their own results with other studies - to what extent are they relevant if the research population does not have scientific selection criteria, an adequate sampling method and does not represent a consistent proportion of the research population?
How are these obvious vulnerabilities of the database associated with the relevance of the results to the purpose of the analysis?
The conclusions at the end are general, results rather from other information than those provided directly by the analysis.
It is necessary to present in conclusions the irrelevant generalization of the results - although the research hypotheses are correct, the database is extremely limited.
The authors mention the regional differences in Indonesia but do not justify the selection for research of East Java Province and relevant for the association of the results with the assessment that "digitalization is not a well-integrated component of Indonesia's national poverty-reduction strategy".
The work, although interesting as a research goal and the selected method of analysis, does not convince the reader of the scientific added value and usefulness for adjusting public policies.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
No additional comments
