Content of review 1, reviewed on June 05, 2023

I have had a chance to go through your paper and it provides a good overview of trending topics in social media. However, I find issues with your manuscript that can be resolved. Firstly, the manuscript requires an expansion on previous research with relevant citations as you have merely given a glimpse of the extant research. Secondly, I find that supplementary figures 2& 3 are unnecessary and they can be described in the text of the manuscript. Similarly, I find that the figures 3A-3D,4A-4C,5A-5C,6A-6D &7A &B; have unusually long captions these can be incorporated in the text of the manuscript or as a note. Thirdly, the most important part of any manuscript is the discussion which helps readers to compare past research. This part should include relevant citations of extant literature. Fourthly, I feel that the thematic analysis would have more impact if it had some explication of the themes with relevant citations and the addition of a thematic map would make the manuscript well-rounded. Lastly, I recommend you to look at the flow and continuity between paragraphs as some sections particularly the findings and conclusion have this issue.
For instance, Page 8 line 48, Page 7 line 51, etc. The paragraphs are abrupt.

Source

    © 2023 the Reviewer.

Content of review 2, reviewed on September 16, 2023

Good job on the paper. I see a good improvement from the last draft. You have made changes in the literature review and discussion. However, I see a scope for improvement in terms of
a) The title - It can be modified
b)Elucidating how the thematic map was obtained and explaining which themes in research are trending. It will be a huge improvement if you can name the cluster rather than mention the color of the cluster.
c) why are the figure captions so long ? Are they necessary? if so why?
d) I believe adding the web of science researcher ID of authors is unnecessary

Source

    © 2023 the Reviewer.

Content of review 3, reviewed on October 10, 2023

Good job on the revision. There are some changes that you can do to make the manuscript enjoyable for the reader .
1)The significance part can be mentioned in the introduction
2) Check if all sources are properly cited for instance section 3.2 line 4
3)An emphasis on the language and grammar is to be given "section 3.1 "This study comprises two phases " is incorrect kindly proof read the manuscript again for such errors
4)Check if the usage of the term visual graph is correct
5)Please don't start a sentence with "While" (Disscussion),"Such","Because"
6) Please include appropriate captions for all tables and figures.

Source

    © 2023 the Reviewer.

References

    Rujing, X., Jing, L. Y. 2024. Bibliometric analysis of literature on social media trends during the COVID-19 pandemic. Online Information Review.