Intercultural and Interreligious Dialogue Competences in Adolescents in Barcelona and Melilla (Spain)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, 

I hope you are well. I wanted to share with you that I have revised again your article "Intercultural and Interreligious Dialogue competences in adolescents in Barcelona and Melilla (Spain)". After the changes you have implemented, I believe that the manuscript is now ready for publication. You have done an excellent job in incorporating the suggested modifications and have significantly improved the content.

Congratulations on a job well done!

Best regards

Author Response

The authors agree with the evaluator's perception that section 4 should come before section 3, which would favor reading. However, the order followed by the sections is the one that the magazine itself incorporates in its template and that can be seen in other published articles. However, if the editor considers it so, we have no objection to making this proposed change. If it is necessary to send a new revised version with this modification, just let us know.
Regarding the possible confusion between “facts and perceptions”, we must indicate that, always, the authors have evaluated adolescents' perceptions; at no time have aspects related to the facts been measured, such as the number of hours or the contents worked on in this possible training, as well as the suitability of the training or the methodology followed.
We hope that with these contributions we have responded to what was indicated by the evaluator.
We hope that the changes and comments are sufficient to respond to the evaluators' requests.
We appreciate your time and consideration.
Receive a cordial greeting.

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have read the authors' response to my second report and I understand the difficulties they have faced, although I do not share all their arguments. Moreover, the important deficiencies I have pointed out remain.
However, having three favorable reports I believe that Religions can legitimately decide to publish it. In that case I think it would be very convenient to include in the introduction of the paper the additional information that the authors provide on the situation of education in Melilla and Barcelona in their response to my second report.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We have made the improvements as you indicated in your last report, we consider that the text has improved and provided answers to your comments.

Thank you for your suggestions.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The "new" article maintains what for me is a serious problem, namely the order of the headings. Presenting the results (Results) before explaining how they were obtained (Materials and Methods) is logically inconsistent. The problems of comprehension and the perception of incoherence that this order produces in the reading of the results are maintained in the "new" version so, my assessment remains the same, I still think that the order of the headings should be changed (Present the methods before the results).

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We have made the improvements as you indicated in your last report, we consider that the text has improved and provided answers to your comments.

Thank you for your suggestions.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for this excellent study which shed light on a key issue: the different modalities teen-agers perceive their peers of different cultures and religions in a fast changing Mediterranean European panorama. The study, a part from shedding light on the specif areas of interest of the author, may inspire similar studies to other scholars in regards to other cities and areas.

Author Response

We hope that the changes and comments are sufficient to respond to the evaluators' requests.
We appreciate your time and consideration.
Receive a cordial greeting.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Fine

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I suggest moving section 4 to the 3th place. To present the results before the methods leads to inconsistencies when reading the results because questions referring, for example, to having received religious education are commented on as “students perceived they had been taught enough religion”. The impression of the reader is that the authors are confusing facts and perceptions.

Everything would be clear from the begining if the methods section were placed before the results section.

Author Response

Dear editor:
In response to the comments received, we inform you that we have proceeded to make various changes requested by the reviewers in the revised version of the article. Also, we have made some clarifications that you can see in the response to the various comments.
Before starting, we would like to thank the reviewers for their time and feedback to improve the manuscript and we hope we have responded appropriately to their requests.
REVISOR 1.
I suggest moving section 4 to the 3th place. To present the results before the methods leads to inconsistencies when reading the results because questions referring, for example, to having received religious education are commented on as “students perceived they had been taught enough religion”. The impression of the reader is that the authors are confusing facts and perceptions.
Everything would be clear from the begining if the methods section were placed before the results section.
Answer:
The authors agree with the evaluator's perception that section 4 should come before section 3, which would favor reading. However, the order followed by the sections is the one that the magazine itself incorporates in its template and that can be seen in other published articles. However, if the editor considers it so, we have no objection to making this proposed change. If it is necessary to send a new revised version with this modification, just let us know.
Regarding the possible confusion between “facts and perceptions”, we must indicate that, always, the authors have evaluated adolescents' perceptions; at no time have aspects related to the facts been measured, such as the number of hours or the contents worked on in this possible training, as well as the suitability of the training or the methodology followed.
We hope that with these contributions we have responded to what was indicated by the evaluator.
We hope that the changes and comments are sufficient to respond to the evaluators' requests.
We appreciate your time and consideration.
Receive a cordial greeting.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. The article presents the results of a research process that sets out interesting but excessively generic objectives. This lack of precision in the formulation of objectives is reflected in an inefficient methodological approach.
First, the application of a questionnaire to high school students in order to identify their levels of competence in intercultural and interreligious dialogue is based on four components isolated from their school and social context, given the way the sample was constructed and the selection and application of the independent variables. In addition to the four independent variables selected - Age, Gender, Country of family origin, City of residence - the religious affiliation of the respondents should have been included (taking into account the non-practicing persons who would undoubtedly appear among the native students). This variable, together with national origin, should have been crossed with the results so that the responses would have relevant scientific value from the point of view of the research objectives.
Secondly, the random sample by clusters is a black box, insofar as it does not take into account the peculiar characteristics of the student body of each center. Schools in the Spanish educational system are homogeneous in terms of cultural ethnicity and the socioeconomic and cultural status of the families of their students. This fact should have been taken into account in the construction of the sample. Moreover, the population of foreign origin is concentrated in public schools and, given that most of them occupy the lowest social strata, they tend to form school ghettos located in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods of the cities. On the other hand, most of the private subsidized schools in the Spanish educational system hardly accept students of foreign origin. For this reason, it is difficult to find centers where students of national and foreign origin are enrolled indistinctly. These circumstances should have been taken into account in the sampling process, which should have been stratified according to these parameters.
Consequently, the response to the questionnaire of adolescents attending segregated schools, in which students of different origins coexist without contact with national students, cannot be treated in the same way as that of students in multicultural schools, in which this contact does occur.
In short, from the point of view of the research objectives, a diverse population is treated as if it were homogeneous.
2. Beyond affirming that Malilla and Barcelona constitute different cultural contexts, the interest in making a comparison between the two cities is not explained.
3. The environment from which the sample is drawn is not sufficiently contextualized. Only a small amount of data is offered on the proportion of Muslim inhabitants of Moroccan origin in Melilla. But it is not known whether there are other migrant groups. In Barcelona, no data is offered on these issues, which would be desirable. Nor are existing studies on racism and xenophobic prejudices in Spain or in these cities cited.
4) No information is provided on the proportion and distribution of students of foreign origin in secondary schools in both cities.

Author Response

Dear editor:
In response to the comments received, we inform you that we have proceeded to make various changes requested by the reviewers in the revised version of the article. Also, we have made some clarifications that you can see in the response to the various comments.
Before starting, we would like to thank the reviewers for their time and feedback to improve the manuscript and we hope we have responded appropriately to their requests.
REVISOR 2
1. The article presents the results of a research process that sets out interesting but excessively generic objectives. This lack of precision in the formulation of objectives is reflected in an inefficient methodological approach.
First, the application of a questionnaire to high school students in order to identify their levels of competence in intercultural and interreligious dialogue is based on four components isolated from their school and social context, given the way the sample was constructed and the selection and application of the independent variables. In addition to the four independent variables selected - Age, Gender, Country of family origin, City of residence - the religious affiliation of the respondents should have been included (taking into account the non-practicing persons who would undoubtedly appear among the native students). This variable, together with national origin, should have been crossed with the results so that the responses would have relevant scientific value from the point of view of the research objectives.
Secondly, the random sample by clusters is a black box, insofar as it does not take into account the peculiar characteristics of the student body of each center. Schools in the Spanish educational system are homogeneous in terms of cultural ethnicity and the socioeconomic and cultural status of the families of their students. This fact should have been taken into account in the construction of the sample. Moreover, the population of foreign origin is concentrated in public schools and, given that most of them occupy the lowest social strata, they tend to form school ghettos located in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods of the cities. On the other hand, most of the private subsidized schools in the Spanish educational system hardly accept students of foreign origin. For this reason, it is difficult to find centers where students of national and foreign origin are enrolled indistinctly. These circumstances should have been taken into account in the sampling process, which should have been stratified according to these parameters.
Consequently, the response to the questionnaire of adolescents attending segregated schools, in which students of different origins coexist without contact with national students, cannot be treated in the same way as that of students in multicultural schools, in which this contact does occur.
In short, from the point of view of the research objectives, a diverse population is treated as if it were homogeneous.
Answer:
The authors understand that the proposed objectives meet the writing criteria since they are precise, measurable, relevant and achievable. With respect to the first objective "Describe aspects related to coexistence, religion and spirituality in contexts
of cultural and religious diversity, in high schools", data is presented that shows what the relationships are like between students of different religions and cultures, what attitudes present these students towards religious and cultural diversity, as well as the coexistence experiences they have had; Regarding the second objective “Identify the degree of interreligious sensitivity that adolescents have”, the data provided help us understand the sensitivity that students have towards other cultures and religion based on their own beliefs; The third objective “Analyze the competencies for conflict management in the context of diversity that adolescents have”, describes the type of behaviors that adolescents perform when facing a conflict; Finally, the objective “To know the prejudices that this youth has towards young people who migrate alone”, results are obtained on the students' prejudices from a Likert scale.
In reference to the hypotheses, the authors highlight that this work aims to describe a reality at the time of its realization. It is true that some relationships are presented that, we understand, could help us establish cause-effect, but really the proposed objectives are more oriented towards the description of the objective investigated, being a first approximation to the concrete reality of this study.
Improvement feedback is greatly appreciated. We understand that expanding the contextual and identification variables of the sample, as well as the differences between center typologies, are limitations of the study presented.
The multicultural and multireligious reality described by the reviewer is appropriate for the city of Barcelona or others, but it does not fit the reality of Melilla. In the case of Melilla this is impossible. The distribution is more or less similar due to the high multi-religious and plural situation of the city.
2. Beyond affirming that Melilla and Barcelona constitute different cultural contexts, the interest in making a comparison between the two cities is not explained.
Answer:
The differences between both cities are explained in the introduction. Melilla is a multicultural city since its creation. The coexistence of diverse cultures has more than five centuries. Barcelona has a more recent immigration reality. In our opinion, these differences justify the comparison of both realities from a descriptive analysis point of view.
3. The environment from which the sample is drawn is not sufficiently contextualized. Only a small amount of data is offered on the proportion of Muslim inhabitants of Moroccan origin in Melilla. But it is not known whether there are other migrant groups. In Barcelona, no data is offered on these issues, which would be desirable. Nor are existing studies on racism and xenophobic prejudices in Spain or in these cities cited.
Answer:
We have added to the discussion the results of the Discrimination Observatory in Barcelona 2022 published by the Barcelona City Council (2023).
In Melilla:
Segura-Robles, A., Gallardo-Vigil, I. & Alemany-Arrebola, I. (2016). Prejudiced attitudes of university students toward immigrants in an irregular situation: an exploratory study. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 14 (2), 393-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.14204/ejrep.39.15069
Segura-Robles, A. (2017), Actitudes prejuiciosas en estudiantes universitarios hacia la inmigración irregular en un contexto fronterizo. [Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Granada]. Digibug: repositorio institucional de la Universidad de Granada. http://hdl.handle.net/10481/47197. Dirigida por M. Á. Gallardo-Vigil & I. Alemany-Arrebola
4) No information is provided on the proportion and distribution of students of foreign origin in secondary schools in both cities.
Answer:
This type of data is not provided by the educational authorities in both cities.
We hope that the changes and comments are sufficient to respond to the evaluators' requests.
We appreciate your time and consideration.
Receive a cordial greeting.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

 

I would like to begin by expressing my appreciation for the effort and dedication you have invested in the elaboration of your research entitled "Intercultural and Interreligious Dialogue in Barcelona and Melilla (Spain)". It is evident that you have put significant work into this project.

 

After careful review of their manuscript, I must share some candid reflections on its suitability for publication in Religions. While I acknowledge the work done, after careful analysis, I feel that in its current state, the article does not meet the standards necessary to be part of the aforementioned journal. Some of these observations are:

 

First, I have noticed that the manuscript does not follow the standard IMRyDC format for empirical research. I suggest that you reorganize the content so that you first address the method used and then present the results obtained. This adjustment will provide a more coherent structure to your work.

 

In addition, the current title is rather general and could benefit from more specificity that clearly reflects the focus of your study. A more precise title will make it easier for readers to identify the relevance of your research.

 

The abstract also requires attention, as it should follow the IMRyDC format and reflect the structure of the manuscript. A reorganization here would help readers better understand the scope and objectives of your study.

 

As for the research objectives, I find them too broad. I suggest you simplify them and instead state the hypotheses you hope to confirm or refute based on the literature review conducted.

 

As for the results, they are presented too briefly. I encourage you to argue more extensively, avoiding the simple enumeration of findings. This will provide a deeper understanding of the relevance of your results.

 

Conclusions also require revision. Avoid an overly schematic presentation and instead argue in more detail about the implications of your findings.

 

Therefore, based on these considerations, I am in the position of suggesting that you make the necessary modifications before resubmitting your work to Religions or any other journal of similar prestige. The revision and implementation of the recommendations provided are essential to elevate the quality and consistency of your manuscript.

 

I appreciate your understanding and willingness to consider these observations seriously. I am confident that, with appropriate adjustments, your research can reach the standards required for publication in a high impact journal.

 

Best regards. 

Author Response

Dear editor:
In response to the comments received, we inform you that we have proceeded to make various changes requested by the reviewers in the revised version of the article. Also, we have made some clarifications that you can see in the response to the various comments.
Before starting, we would like to thank the reviewers for their time and feedback to improve the manuscript and we hope we have responded appropriately to their requests.
REVISOR 3. First, I have noticed that the manuscript does not follow the standard IMRyDC format for empirical research. I suggest that you reorganize the content so that you first address the method used and then present the results obtained. This adjustment will provide a more coherent structure to your work.
Answer:
As we have mentioned before, in reviewer 1, the authors also think that the sections do not follow the standard of a research, but we have only followed the template that the journal has for the publication of articles. Once again we indicate that, for our part, there is no problem altering the order to adjust it to the IMRyDC standard. We remain attentive to the editor's decision on this aspect.
In addition, the current title is rather general and could benefit from more specificity that clearly reflects the focus of your study. A more precise title will make it easier for readers to identify the relevance of your research.
Answer:
The title of the article focuses on the study construct (competences for intercultural and interreligious dialogue) although it is true that the population was not specified. We have added that this is the adolescent population. The construct that makes up such competencies is specified in the body of the article. Therefore, the new title would be “Competences for intercultural and interreligious dialogue in adolescents from Barcelona and Melilla”
The abstract also requires attention, as it should follow the IMRyDC format and reflect the structure of the manuscript. A reorganization here would help readers better understand the scope and objectives of your study.
Answer:
The summary has been modified and improved, following the IMRyDC format. As for the research objectives, I find them too broad. I suggest you simplify them and instead state the hypotheses you hope to confirm or refute based on the literature review conducted.
Answer:
The authors understand that the proposed objectives meet the writing criteria since they are precise, measurable, relevant and achievable. With respect to the first objective "Describe aspects related to coexistence, religion and spirituality in contexts
of cultural and religious diversity, in high schools", data is presented that shows what the relationships are like between students of different religions and cultures, what attitudes present these students towards religious and cultural diversity, as well as the coexistence experiences they have had; Regarding the second objective “Identify the degree of interreligious sensitivity that adolescents have”, the data provided help us understand the sensitivity that students have towards other cultures and religion based on their own beliefs; The third objective “Analyze the competencies for conflict management in the context of diversity that adolescents have”, describes the type of behaviors that adolescents perform when facing a conflict; Finally, the objective “To know the prejudices that this youth has towards young people who migrate alone”, results are obtained on the students' prejudices from a Likert scale.
In reference to the hypotheses, the authors highlight that this work aims to describe a reality at the time of its realization. It is true that some relationships are presented that, we understand, could help us establish cause-effect, but really the proposed objectives are more oriented towards the description of the objective investigated, being a first approximation to the concrete reality of this study.
As for the results, they are presented too briefly. I encourage you to argue more extensively, avoiding the simple enumeration of findings. This will provide a deeper understanding of the relevance of your results.
Answer:
We improved this aspect as can be seen in the new version of the manuscript. Conclusions also require revision. Avoid an overly schematic presentation and instead argue in more detail about the implications of your findings.
Answer:
It has been improved.
We hope that the changes and comments are sufficient to respond to the evaluators' requests.
We appreciate your time and consideration.
Receive a cordial greeting.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

First and foremost, I want to express my commendation to the authors for undertaking such a thorough and comprehensive study. This research is truly exemplary and, in the truest sense of the word, is highly representative.

However, I would like to propose a few suggestions to the authors, acknowledging that implementing them might necessitate certain adjustments to the work.

1.        While the authors assert that schools is “one of our most influential tools for developing the values of tolerance and solidarity” (line 62-63), I believe it would be beneficial for the authors to provide a more explicit explanation of the specific prejudices being addressed. It would enhance clarity if the authors could elaborate on the nature of these prejudices and identify the particular stereotypes in question. As indicated in the paper, it is evident that young people, particularly students, tend to associate more with those who share similar preferences. Yet, the manifestation of intolerance, especially towards unaccompanied migrants, remains somewhat unclear. What stereotypes are at play here? It would be beneficial to provide an explanation, in one or two sentences at the least, elucidating the specific stereotypes and prejudices under discussion

2.            Additionally, it would be valuable for the authors to outline concrete steps that could be taken, beyond simply enriching the school curriculum with content related to friendship, tolerance, and an understanding of diversity. Specifically, what actions or initiatives could be implemented to foster a more inclusive environment for unaccompanied migrants? Providing practical recommendations would not only strengthen the study but also offer valuable insights for policymakers and educators looking to address these issues effectively.

Author Response

Dear editor:
In response to the comments received, we inform you that we have proceeded to make various changes requested by the reviewers in the revised version of the article. Also, we have made some clarifications that you can see in the response to the various comments.
Before starting, we would like to thank the reviewers for their time and feedback to improve the manuscript and we hope we have responded appropriately to their requests.
REVISOR 4. While the authors assert that schools is “one of our most influential tools for developing the values of tolerance and solidarity” (line 62-63), I believe it would be beneficial for the authors to provide a more explicit explanation of the specific prejudices being addressed. It would enhance clarity if the authors could elaborate on the nature of these prejudices and identify the particular stereotypes in question. As indicated in the paper, it is evident that young people, particularly students, tend to associate more with those who share similar preferences. Yet, the manifestation of intolerance, especially towards unaccompanied migrants, remains somewhat unclear. What stereotypes are at play here? It would be beneficial to provide an explanation, in one or two sentences at the least, elucidating the specific stereotypes and prejudices under discussion
Answer:
It has been improved in results, providing some specifications about stereotypes and prejudices under discussion. Additionally, it would be valuable for the authors to outline concrete steps that could be taken, beyond simply enriching the school curriculum with content related to friendship, tolerance, and an understanding of diversity. Specifically, what actions or initiatives could be implemented to foster a more inclusive environment for unaccompanied migrants? Providing practical recommendations would not only strengthen the study but also offer valuable insights for policymakers and educators looking to address these issues effectively.
Answer:
After the conclusions, we present a series of measures and practices that could be carried out in educational centers and that may be more effective in promoting competencies for interreligious and intercultural dialogue.
We hope that the changes and comments are sufficient to respond to the evaluators' requests.
We appreciate your time and consideration.
Receive a cordial greeting.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The new arguments used to defend the type of sample used in this research do not add the necessary methodological coherence to the relationship between the four research objectives formulated at the end of point 1, the selection of independent variables and the final results of the study.

 The appeal to the lack of official data on the distribution and characteristics of students of foreign origin in the city of Barcelona does not exempt from their knowledge. Every Faculty of Education in a Spanish university, including those to which the authors belong, has sufficient knowledge of the school map of the area in which the Faculty is located to apply this knowledge in a sample design. So, the selection of the sample could have been made on the basis of such knowledge.

On the other hand, it should be said that, in addition to the two majority communities, -the Muslim Berber and the Indo-European-, in Melilla there is a historical presence of relevant minorities such as the Hebrew, the Gypsy and the Hindu, to which in recent years the presence of illegal immigrants has been added. Although some sources, without providing data, consider Melilla to be a model of intercultural coexistence in which both majorities attend the same centers in the city, other sources provide data from which it can be deduced that schooling in the compulsory stages undergoes an intense process of segregation in which both socioeconomic status and national origin concur.

José Luis López Belmonte observed in his introduction to "Diversidad educativa y educación intercultural" that "there is a very marked gap between the socio-cultural conditions of public and subsidized schools in Melilla and Ceuta, with a serious risk of social fragmentation" (2013, GEEPP Ediciones, SATE-STEs Melilla, GEEPP Ediciones).

Secondly, the report "Aprendizaje y ciclo vital. La desigualdad de oportunidades desde la educación preescolar hasta la edad adulta" (2014, Obra Social "la Caixa") states that "the specificity of Ceuta and Melilla will most certainly be the result of the many socio-political particularities of these cities among which I could highlight the presence of an ethnically very heterogeneous population that would push the middle classes to private or concerted centers with greater intensity than in the rest of the State, which would create stronger processes of school segregation".

Finally, in the 2017-2018 academic year, the number of students of foreign origin in non-university education reached 12% and is mainly concentrated in public schools, where the vast majority of the group is concentrated (2021, “La segregación escolar, las desigualdades educativas y el modelo educativo de la derecha en España”).

Thus, although we have not found precise data on school segregation by national origin in Melilla's secondary schools, the data found point in the direction indicated in my first report.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

The answers to your comments are in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

 

First, I wish to express my sincere appreciation for the obvious effort and dedication you have invested in significantly improving your work. 

 

However, after carefully reviewing the section corresponding to the results and conclusions, I noticed that, although they have provided a more detailed explanation, the use of enumerations still persists, which, from my perspective, could detract from the formality of the content. I believe that dispensing with this format would contribute significantly to the overall quality of the manuscript.

 

My suggestion is that, if you have already presented the results and conclusions in a detailed manner in a more fluid and coherent way, omit presenting the ideas in a numbered manner.  

 

I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to review your work and congratulate you again for your dedication and achievements in this project.

 

Best regards 

Author Response

However, after carefully reviewing the section corresponding to the results and conclusions, I noticed that, although they have provided a more detailed explanation, the use of enumerations still persists, which, from my perspective, could detract from the formality of the content. I believe that dispensing with this format would contribute significantly to the overall quality of the manuscript.

 

My suggestion is that, if you have already presented the results and conclusions in a detailed manner in a more fluid and coherent way, omit presenting the ideas in a numbered manner.  

Answer:

The authors would like to thank you for your comments and contributions, as they have been very valuable and have helped to improve this article. In relation to this contribution we have made several modifications in the "Results" section as you will see in lines 230, 285 and 324. In addition, the conclusions have been improved from line 522 onwards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf