Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping

Integrating Digital Technologies into the... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772" }, "headline": "Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature...", "datePublished": "2025-08-06T15:33:45", "dateModified": "2025-12-01T10:41:58", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Andrea Basantes-Andrade" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Gabriela Bastidas-Amador" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Claudia Ruiz-Chagna" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Marlen Congo-Cervantes" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Gabriela Quintana-Andrade" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": " Background The development of intercultural competences mediated by digital technologies has gained prominence in higher education, driven by academic internationalization and the advancement of virtual learning environments. However, questions remain regarding the most frequently studied competence dimensions, the geographic regions involved, and the methodologies employed. Methods A systematic literature mapping was conducted following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines to analyze scientific production from 2005 to 2024, sourced from Scopus, Web of Science, and SciELO. Inclusion criteria focused on peer-reviewed, open-access articles, in English or Spanish, addressing the integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competence. After screening 176 records, 23 studies were included for analysis. Results Scientific production was primarily concentrated in the Americas and Europe (78%), with Mexico (15%) and countries such as the United States, Spain, and Russia each accounting for 11%. The most frequent competence dimensions were adaptation and management (47.83%), intercultural knowledge (39.13%), communication skills (39.13%), and intercultural attitudes (39.13%). Competences such as cultural adaptability, intercultural awareness, and intercultural communication were the most frequently addressed, reflecting the need for flexibility and communication skills in multicultural contexts. Technologies like COIL (Collaborative Online International Learning) and immersive tools are emerging as effective strategies to promote intercultural learning, although areas such as innovative leadership (4.35%) and personal development (8.70%) remain underexplored. Temporally, there has been sustained growth in research since 2019, with peaks in 2021, 2022, and 2023. Conclusion Digital technologies show significant potential for the development of intercultural competences, but their implementation requires addressing structural, pedagogical, and equity-related gaps. This study lays the groundwork for future research and policies aimed at enhancing inclusive and sustainable intercultural education in digital environments. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772", "name": "Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural..." } } ] } Home Browse Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Basantes-Andrade A, Bastidas-Amador G, Ruiz-Chagna C et al. Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167364.3 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Systematic Review Revised Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] Previously titled: *Integración de tecnologías digitales en la enseñanza de competencias interculturales: mapeo sistemático de la literatura* Andrea Basantes-Andrade https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1045-2126 1 , Gabriela Bastidas-Amador https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2370-5065 2 , Claudia Ruiz-Chagna 2 , Marlen Congo-Cervantes 2 , Gabriela Quintana-Andrade 2 Andrea Basantes-Andrade https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1045-2126 1 , Gabriela Bastidas-Amador https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2370-5065 2 , [...] Claudia Ruiz-Chagna 2 , Marlen Congo-Cervantes 2 , Gabriela Quintana-Andrade 2 PUBLISHED 01 Dec 2025 Author details Author details 1 Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, Imbabura, 100105, Ecuador 2 Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, Imbabura, 100105, Ecuador Andrea Basantes-Andrade Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Gabriela Bastidas-Amador Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Claudia Ruiz-Chagna Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Marlen Congo-Cervantes Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Gabriela Quintana-Andrade Roles: Data Curation, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS This article is included in the Teaching and communicating science in a digital age collection. Abstract Background The development of intercultural competences mediated by digital technologies has gained prominence in higher education, driven by academic internationalization and the advancement of virtual learning environments. However, questions remain regarding the most frequently studied competence dimensions, the geographic regions involved, and the methodologies employed. Methods A systematic literature mapping was conducted following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines to analyze scientific production from 2005 to 2024, sourced from Scopus, Web of Science, and SciELO. Inclusion criteria focused on peer-reviewed, open-access articles, in English or Spanish, addressing the integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competence. After screening 176 records, 23 studies were included for analysis. Results Scientific production was primarily concentrated in the Americas and Europe (78%), with Mexico (15%) and countries such as the United States, Spain, and Russia each accounting for 11%. The most frequent competence dimensions were adaptation and management (47.83%), intercultural knowledge (39.13%), communication skills (39.13%), and intercultural attitudes (39.13%). Competences such as cultural adaptability, intercultural awareness, and intercultural communication were the most frequently addressed, reflecting the need for flexibility and communication skills in multicultural contexts. Technologies like COIL (Collaborative Online International Learning) and immersive tools are emerging as effective strategies to promote intercultural learning, although areas such as innovative leadership (4.35%) and personal development (8.70%) remain underexplored. Temporally, there has been sustained growth in research since 2019, with peaks in 2021, 2022, and 2023. Conclusion Digital technologies show significant potential for the development of intercultural competences, but their implementation requires addressing structural, pedagogical, and equity-related gaps. This study lays the groundwork for future research and policies aimed at enhancing inclusive and sustainable intercultural education in digital environments. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords intercultural competences, intercultural education, digital education, digital technologies, higher education, COIL, systematic mapping, systematic review Corresponding Author(s) Andrea Basantes-Andrade ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Andrea Basantes-Andrade Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2025 Basantes-Andrade A et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Basantes-Andrade A, Bastidas-Amador G, Ruiz-Chagna C et al. Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167364.3 ) First published: 06 Aug 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167364.1 ) Latest published: 01 Dec 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167364.3 ) Revised Amendments from Version 2 This second version of the article includes several updates aimed at improving clarity and organization. The introduction was adjusted to offer a smoother explanation of the key concepts and to better connect the topic with current discussions on intercultural competence. Some sections in the Methods were clarified so that the search process, criteria, and study selection are easier to follow. In the Results, the information was reorganized to make the trends and categories more understandable, and some descriptions were rewritten to ensure they are more consistent and easier to read. A few notes were added to explain certain decisions made during the analysis, helping readers follow the logic behind the classifications. Finally, minor edits were made throughout the text to improve flow, coherence, and readability. Overall, Version 2 offers a clearer and more accessible presentation of the study, while keeping the same scope and main findings. This second version of the article includes several updates aimed at improving clarity and organization. The introduction was adjusted to offer a smoother explanation of the key concepts and to better connect the topic with current discussions on intercultural competence. Some sections in the Methods were clarified so that the search process, criteria, and study selection are easier to follow. In the Results, the information was reorganized to make the trends and categories more understandable, and some descriptions were rewritten to ensure they are more consistent and easier to read. A few notes were added to explain certain decisions made during the analysis, helping readers follow the logic behind the classifications. Finally, minor edits were made throughout the text to improve flow, coherence, and readability. Overall, Version 2 offers a clearer and more accessible presentation of the study, while keeping the same scope and main findings. See the authors' detailed response to the review by Lies Sercu See the authors' detailed response to the review by Eleni Korosidou See the authors' detailed response to the review by Nicia Guillén Yparrea See the authors' detailed response to the review by Murod Ismailov READ REVIEWER RESPONSES Introduction In an increasingly globalized world, the development of intercultural competences has become an essential component of higher education, as it enables students to operate effectively in diverse and multicultural environments ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Kuffuor et al., 2024 ). These competences go beyond attitudes toward other groups; they encompass understanding and knowledge of different worldviews, as well as the ability to adapt behaviorally for effective interaction ( Schwarzenthal et al., 2019 ). Intercultural competence is defined as the combination of knowledge about various cultures and sociocultural contexts, together with communication skills and key attitudes such as empathy, openness, and adaptability ( Nikiforova & Skvortsova, 2021 ; Rokos et al., 2023 ). Following Jin and Sercu (2025) , intercultural competence is conceptualized as a multidimensional construct integrating cognitive (knowledge), affective (attitudes), and behavioral (skills) components that enable effective interaction across cultural contexts. Its development is crucial for promoting inclusion, strengthening social cohesion, improving employability, and facilitating collaboration in international settings ( Hei et al., 2019 ; Sierra-Huedo & Foucart, 2022 ). It is built upon three essential elements: intercultural communication, which enables meaningful expression and understanding of messages ( Gutiérrez-Santiuste & Ritacco-Real, 2024 ); intercultural sensitivity, which fosters empathy and the recognition of cultural differences ( Huang et al., 2024 ; Swartz et al., 2020 ); and intercultural responsibility, which involves an ethical commitment to solidarity, critical cooperation, and mutual respect ( Neubauer, 2022 ; Zhang, 2024 ). These elements are key for building more inclusive and collaborative societies. Traditionally, pedagogical approaches have prioritized unidirectional models with few opportunities for intercultural interaction ( Mara, 2021 ; Nguyen et al., 2022 ). However, the advancement of digital technologies has transformed these educational paradigms, providing innovative tools for the teaching of intercultural competences. Virtual platforms, communication applications, and collaborative learning environments have proven effective in fostering awareness and interaction among students from diverse cultures, promoting experiential learning and the development of intercultural skills ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Li et al., 2020 ; Nguyen et al., 2022 ). Recent studies highlight that digitally based experiential teaching enhances student motivation and engagement and strengthens their ability to critically analyze their cultural identity in relation to others ( Han et al., 2022 ; Kholod et al., 2023 ; Li et al., 2020 ). Moreover, the use of immersive environments, such as the metaverse, has emerged as an innovative strategy for developing global competences, allowing interaction in simulated scenarios that replicate multicultural contexts ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ). This experiential approach facilitates the practice of skills in a controlled and safe environment, promoting the development of empathy, adaptability, and communication skills—essential elements in a multicultural context ( Pei et al., 2023 ). The growing interest in integrating digital technologies into the teaching of intercultural competences has driven advances in the field; however, the current literature still faces significant challenges. These include the scarcity of systematic studies that allow for generalization of results and assessment of the long-term effectiveness of these educational strategies ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Klimova & Chen, 2024 ; Wang et al., 2024 ); the need to understand the impact of technology on the development of communication skills and the consolidation of inclusive attitudes in globalized contexts ( Melnyk & Koroban, 2024 ); and the analysis of their ethical and pedagogical implications, particularly regarding the use of immersive digital tools such as artificial intelligence and virtual reality in intercultural teaching ( Klimova & Chen, 2024 ). In response to these gaps, the present study conducts a systematic literature mapping to analyze the integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences. Articles published between 2005 and 2024 were examined, following the PRISMA protocol and selecting studies indexed in high-impact databases. This methodological approach ensures the validity and reliability of the findings, enabling the identification of trends, methodological approaches, and research gaps. Although regional and disciplinary patterns are mentioned in the results to illustrate diversity within the existing literature, this study does not aim to perform a comparative analysis across regions or academic fields. Instead, it adopts a descriptive and exploratory approach consistent with a systematic literature mapping, focusing on identifying overall trends, methodological approaches, and thematic research gaps in the use of digital technologies for intercultural competence education. These research questions were designed to operationalize the gaps identified in the literature, particularly the lack of longitudinal evidence, ethical analyses of immersive technologies, and systematic overviews, through a descriptive and exploratory mapping approach. This alignment ensures that the study not only identifies trends but also highlights areas requiring deeper critical inquiry in future research. To guide the analysis, the following six research questions were formulated: RQ1. In which countries and/or regions is research concentrated? RQ2. What types of digital technologies are used in the teaching of intercultural competences? RQ3. In which areas does research on the integration of digital technologies focus, such as communication skills, cultural attitudes, and technological adoption? RQ4. Which intercultural competences are addressed? RQ5. What are the limitations of the research? RQ6. What are the future research directions regarding intercultural competences? This study provides a comprehensive overview of advances in the teaching of intercultural competences through digital technologies, establishing a reference framework for designing future research and developing educational policies aimed at promoting inclusion and diversity in academic and professional contexts. Methods This study presents a systematic literature mapping (SLM) aimed at analyzing the scientific production on the integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences. This methodology provides a comprehensive overview of the available literature within a defined time frame, identifying trends, methodological approaches, and research gaps ( Kitchenham et al., 2009 ). Systematic literature mapping complements a systematic literature review (SLR) by offering a preliminary exploratory analysis, allowing the identification of trends and research gaps prior to applying more restrictive criteria in a more rigorous and exhaustive SLR ( Kitchenham et al., 2010 ). To ensure methodological rigor, the study followed the guidelines of the PRISMA 2020 protocol (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) ( Farisyi et al., 2022 ; Moher et al., 2015 ), ensuring validity and transparency in the selection and analysis of the reviewed studies. Additionally, the methodological guidelines proposed by Petersen et al. (2015) and Sinoara et al. (2017) were considered, as they establish specific criteria for identifying, organizing, and classifying the literature in systematic reviews. Although PRISMA 2020 was originally developed for systematic literature reviews (SLRs), in this study it was adapted as a guiding framework for conducting a systematic literature mapping (SLM), due to its standardized structure and ability to ensure transparency in study selection. Additionally, methodological elements from Petersen et al. (2015) were incorporated; their mapping study guidelines are widely used in fields such as software engineering but are also applicable to educational research. Therefore, this study combines the methodological traceability of PRISMA with the classificatory logic of the Petersen model, enabling a rigorous and reproducible analysis of the scientific production. Eligibility criteria To ensure the relevance and quality of the studies included, five inclusion criteria were established: IC1. Scientific articles written in English or Spanish. IC2. Studies published in Scopus, Web of Science, and SciELO in their final version. IC3. Articles published between January 2005 and December 2024. IC4. Studies available in Open Access format. Open-access studies were prioritized to ensure replicability, transparency, and equitable access in accordance with open science principles, consistent with F1000Research standards. IC5. Research related to the integration of technology in the teaching of intercultural competences. Likewise, exclusion criteria were defined to eliminate studies that did not meet the methodological standards of systematic literature mapping. The following were excluded: EC1. Duplicate articles in the consulted databases. EC2. Theses, books, book chapters, and conference papers, as they do not comply with the peer-review process of indexed scientific journals. EC3. Articles not available in open access, whose full content could not be reviewed. EC4. Studies outside the scope of interest, i.e., those that do not directly address the integration of technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences. EC5. Publications in a preprint state or without peer review, which do not meet scientific validity criteria. The studies were grouped for synthesis based on their alignment with the research questions (RQ1–RQ6), prioritizing those that explicitly addressed the integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences in higher education contexts. Studies that, although mentioning any of the variables of interest, did not directly answer the proposed questions or did not meet the established methodological criteria were excluded. Information sources The search for studies was conducted in three academic databases recognized for their high impact and scientific rigor: Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), and SciELO. These sources were selected due to their coverage of peer-reviewed literature, their relevance in the educational field, and their geographical and linguistic diversity. The last search in each database was performed on January 15, 2025, ensuring the currency of the retrieved records. Search strategy The search strategy was designed based on a preliminary review of the literature and consultation of specialized thesauri, such as ERIC and UNESCO, to identify key terms and relevant synonyms for the object of study. Combinations of keywords related to intercultural competences, digital technologies, digital learning, higher education, and intercultural teaching were used, employing Boolean operators (AND, OR) to optimize the retrieval of relevant documents. The searches were adapted to the syntax of each database to ensure reproducibility. See Table 1 . Table 1. Search strategy used in database. Database Query performed Search equation Scopus, Web of Science (WoS) y SciELO Title, abstract and keywords (“intercultural competence” OR “intercultural skills”) AND (“digital technology” OR “digital learning”) AND (“higher education” OR “university”) Selection and data extraction process All documents retrieved from the Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), and SciELO databases were organized and managed using Microsoft Excel 2019. The study selection followed three stages: (1) title and abstract screening, (2) full-text eligibility assessment, and (3) consensus validation among the reviewers to ensure methodological consistency and transparency. Only studies published in English or Spanish were included. This linguistic scope was defined for both methodological and contextual reasons. The study was conducted in Ecuador, within a Latin American research framework where most of the academic production on intercultural competence and educational technology is disseminated in Spanish or English. These two languages also dominate global scientific communication in the field, ensuring representativeness across key geographic regions such as Latin America, North America, and Europe. Preliminary searches confirmed that studies in other languages represented a minimal portion of the literature and did not contribute substantially to the study’s objectives. This decision therefore reinforces contextual relevance, methodological coherence, and accessibility in line with open research standards. Table 2 summarizes the 23 studies analyzed, including their authors, titles, and publication years. The complete dataset, containing the selection workflow, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the list of all reviewed records, is openly available as Extended Data in Figshare: The role of digital technologies in the development of intercultural competences in higher education: A systematic literature mapping (2005–2024) ( Basantes-Andrade et al., 2025a ; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.7886789.v1 ; License: CC BY 4.0). Table 2. Studies included for systematic review. N° Author’s Title article Year 1 Gómez, M. Competencias interculturales en instructores comunitarios que brindan servicio a la población indígena del estado de Chiapas 2010 2 McCloskey, E. Global Teachers: A Model for Building Teachers’ Intercultural Competence Online 2012 3 Ciftci, E., & Savas, P. The role of telecollaboration in language and intercultural learning: A synthesis of studies published between 2010 and 2015 2018 4 Carmona, M., Cruz, V., & García, L. Desarrollo de competencias sociolingüísticas e interculturales en ELE: propuesta didáctica con blended Learning 2019 5 Dugartsyrenova, V., & Sardegna V. Raising intercultural awareness through voice-based telecollaboration: perceptions, uses, and recommendations 2019 6 Zakharova, I., Kobicheva, A., & Rozova, N. Results Analysis of Russian Students’ Participation in the Online International Educational Project X-Culture 2019 7 Dai, Y. Blended Learning for Intercultural Competence: A Case Study in Engineering Education 2021 8 Rauer, J., Kroiss, M., Kryvinska, N., Engelhardt-Nowitzki, C., & Aburaia M. Cross-university virtual teamwork as a means of internationalization at home 2021 9 Sarmiento, S., García, K., & Pozo, O. Implementación de la metodología Lesson Study en el centro de apoyo San Vicente de Ecuador 2021 10 Villasol, M. Rendimiento académico y patrones de uso del campus virtual: Un estudio de caso controlado 2021 11 Borger, J. Getting to the CoRe of Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) 2022 12 Jorgensen, M., Mason, A., Pedersen, R., & Harrison, R. The Transformative Learning Potential in the Hybrid Space Between Technology and Intercultural Encounters 2022 13 Leiva, J., del Olmo, M., Aguilera, F., & Villalba, M. Promotion of Intercultural Competencies and Use of ICT: Towards a Digitally Inclusive University; [Promoción de Competencias Interculturales y Uso de las TIC: Hacia una Universidad Inclusiva] 2022 14 Munoz-Escalona, P., De Crespo, Z., Marin, M., & Dunn, M. Collaborative online international learning: A way to develop students’ engineering capabilities and awareness to become global citizens 2022 15 Woicolesco, V., Cassol-Silva, C., & Morosini, M. Internationalization at Home and Virtual: A Sustainable Model for Brazilian Higher Education 2022 16 Guillen-Yparrea, N., & Ramirez-Montoya, M. Intercultural Competencies in Higher Education:a systematic review from 2016 to 2021 2023a 17 Guillén-Yparrea, N; Ramírez-Montoya, M. A review of collaboration through intercultural competencies in higher Education 2023b 18 Louahala, N. Developing Learners’ Intercultural Communicative Competence through Online Exchanges: Case of Third-Year Students in Algeria 2023 19 Rubtsova, A., Zheleznyakova, O., Anosova, N., & Dashkina, A. Collaborative Learning in Teaching Culture Studies to Further Training Program Students 2023 20 Simoes, A., & Sangiamchit, C. Internationalization at Home: Enhancing Global Competencies in the EFL Classroom through International Online Collaboration 2023 21 Wiesner-Luna, V., & Burgoa-Godoy, C. International collaborative learning experience between Higher Education Institutions in Colombia and Chile 2023 22 Kosman, B., de Jong, D., Knight-Agarwal, C., Chipchase, LS., Etxebarria, N. The benefits of virtual learning abroad programs for higher education students: A phenomenological research study 2024 23 Savelyeva, N., & Sazonova, N. Contemporary State of the Phenomenon "Digital Intercultural Competence" in Pedagogical Science 2024 The selection of primary studies followed the three phases established in the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram ( Page et al., 2021 ): identification, screening, and inclusion (see Figure 1 ). Figure 1. Flowchart of the literature selection process according to PRISMA 2020. Source : Page et al. (2021) . During the identification phase, a total of 176 records were retrieved from the three selected databases: 16 from Scopus, 76 from Web of Science, and 84 from SciELO. Prior to the screening phase, five duplicate records were removed, resulting in 171 unique studies eligible for title, abstract, and keyword screening. In the screening phase, three reviewers independently analyzed the 171 records. Based on the inclusion criteria, 16 studies were excluded at this stage. The main reasons included lack of relevance to the research questions or insufficient linkage to intercultural competence. Discrepancies in inclusion were discussed and resolved by consensus among the reviewers. As a result, 155 studies progressed to the full-text eligibility assessment. To ensure methodological reliability, a consensus-based validation process was applied throughout the screening and eligibility stages. Inter-rater agreement was assessed during a pilot phase using a subset of studies, reaching over 90% consistency in inclusion decisions among reviewers. Although no formal coefficient (e.g., Cohen’s kappa) was computed, this level of agreement provided strong evidence of shared interpretive criteria and procedural transparency across evaluators. In the eligibility phase, the full texts of the remaining studies were reviewed by five reviewers. This review was also conducted independently. Discrepancies were documented and subsequently discussed until consensus was reached. No automated tools were used at this stage. The methodological quality assessment was carried out using a rubric with ten criteria based on Kitchenham et al. (2009) , employing a Likert-type scale: yes (1 point), partial (0.5 points), and no (0 points). A minimum inclusion threshold of 7 out of 10 points was established to ensure the quality and relevance of the included studies. The criteria evaluated included: Q1: Clarity of objectives regarding the integration of digital technologies. Q2: Methodological coherence and transparency. Q3: Inclusion of higher education teachers or students. Q4: Clear identification of methodological design. Q5: Adequacy in data collection and analysis. Q6: Clarity in the presentation of results. Q7: Explicit reference to the use of digital technologies in education. Q8: Comparison with traditional pedagogical methodologies. Q9: Relevance to the teaching of intercultural competences. Q10: Consistency between objectives, results, and conclusions. Following this assessment, 132 studies were excluded: 126 for not addressing the research questions, 2 for not dealing with intercultural competences, and 4 for not reporting the use of digital technologies. Ultimately, 23 studies were included for detailed analysis. See Table 2 . For data extraction, a structured matrix was designed with the following variables: country or region of publication, type of technology used, area of focus (communication skills, cultural attitudes, or technological adoption), reported limitations, future lines of research, and type of intercultural competence addressed. Each study was assessed based on its alignment with research questions RQ1–RQ6. The absence of explicit information was coded as “not reported.” Data extraction was conducted independently by five reviewers and subsequently consolidated. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion among the reviewers. The data were organized into frequency tables without applying inferential statistical analyses. No heterogeneity or sensitivity analyses were performed, given that the nature of this systematic mapping did not include quantitative comparisons between groups. It is important to note that during data extraction, both the competences and focus areas explicitly stated in the objectives or methodological designs of the studies, as well as those that emerged as observed outcomes or later reflections, were recorded. This distinction was maintained in the analysis matrices, although not all studies clearly differentiated between these levels. Similarly, the categorization of both intercultural competence dimensions and digital tools was non-exclusive. A single study could be associated with multiple competences and tool types. For instance, some technologies, such as COIL, were classified under more than one category due to their multifunctional use across various pedagogical purposes. This approach was methodologically intentional and aimed to more accurately reflect the versatility of digital tools in educational practice. As a result, some of the reported percentages may exceed 100%. Results The most relevant findings from the included studies are presented below, organized according to the formulated research questions, with the aim of facilitating a structured and coherent interpretation of the body of evidence analyzed. RQ1. In which countries and/or regions is research concentrated? The systematic review shows that research on intercultural competences mediated by digital technologies in higher education is primarily concentrated in the Americas and Europe, which together account for 78% of the total studies analyzed. At the national level, Mexico leads scientific production with a frequency of 15% (n=4), followed by the United States, Spain, and Russia, each with 11% (n=3). These figures indicate a clear orientation of the literature toward Western contexts, particularly in countries with active policies of educational internationalization. Australia contributes 7% (n=2), highlighting the growing involvement of Oceania in this field. The United Kingdom also accounts for 7% (n=2), reflecting continued European engagement in the development of digital intercultural competences. Meanwhile, countries such as the United Kingdom, Scotland, Turkey, Algeria, Portugal, Thailand, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Brazil, and Austria each present a frequency of 4% (n=1), reflecting emerging, albeit still limited, geographical diversity. The temporal analysis revealed a significant increase in scientific production from 2019 onward, with 86.96% of the analyzed studies published in this period. The most productive years were 2023 (26.09%), 2022 (21.74%), and 2021 (17.39%), reflecting a growing interest in integrating digital technologies to develop intercultural competences, particularly in higher education settings. Earlier years showed minimal representation. This distribution appears to reflect a real academic trend rather than a limitation of the search strategy, as the databases were comprehensively queried for the entire 2005–2024 period (see Figure 2 ). Figure 2. Temporal distribution of the studies included in the systematic review (2010-2024). RQ2. What types of digital technologies are used in the teaching of intercultural competences? Of the 23 studies included in this systematic review, 22 (95.65%) explicitly report the incorporation of digital technologies as part of their strategies for developing intercultural competences in higher education. The sole exception is the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) , which, although acknowledging the benefits of technologies in intercultural teaching, does not specify the use of concrete digital tools. Its inclusion was retained due to the conceptual contribution it provides in understanding the role of technology in intercultural contexts. However, this lack of specificity limits its comparability with other studies and is considered a methodological limitation in interpreting the results. Among the identified technological categories, digital platforms are the most represented, appearing in 15 studies (68.18%). This category encompasses learning management systems (LMS) such as Blackboard, Moodle, and Canvas, valued for their ability to centralize content, facilitate asynchronous communication, and structure collaborative tasks in virtual environments. Notable examples include the works of Jørgensen et al. (2020) , Zakharova et al. (2019) , and Kosman et al. (2024) , which demonstrate how these platforms foster intercultural interaction in multicultural educational contexts. This is followed by pedagogical technologies and methodological approaches such as COIL (Collaborative Online International Learning), blended learning, videoconferencing platforms (Zoom, Skype), virtual environments, and simulators, reported in 10 studies (45.45%). These tools enable the creation of structured and intentional learning experiences for intercultural interaction, as evidenced by the research of Borger (2022) , Dai (2021) , and Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya (2023a , 2023b) . Digital educational resources, present in 6 studies (27.27%), include gamification, interactive materials, wikis, explanatory videos, Microsoft Forms, and open repositories. These resources serve as didactic complements that allow for the adaptation of content to the cultural particularities of students, as highlighted by Leiva et al. (2022) and Sarmiento et al. (2021) . The category of social networks, also reported in 6 studies (27.27%), involves the use of platforms such as WhatsApp or discussion forums as spaces for informal interaction among students from different cultures. Although still underexplored in formal contexts, studies such as those by Rauer et al. (2021) and Louahala (2023) emphasize their value in fostering spontaneous and authentic cultural exchange. Finally, productivity tools such as Google Drive, Trello, and OneNote appear in 4 studies (18.18%). Although their potential for asynchronous collaboration is recognized, their implementation in intercultural educational contexts remains limited, possibly due to gaps in teacher training regarding their pedagogical use, as suggested by Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) and Louahala (2023) . These findings reflect a clear preference for technologies focused on structured teaching, with still an incipient exploration of tools oriented toward social collaboration and cultural personalization of learning. Table 3 presents a detailed synthesis of the authors, categories, number of studies, and usage percentages. Table 3. Digital technologies used in the teaching of intercultural competences. Authors Technological category Number of studies Percentage McCloskey (2012) ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) ; Zakharova et al. (2019) ; Dai (2021) ; Rauer et al. (2021) ; Villasol (2021) ; Leiva et al. (2022) ; Jorgensen et al. (2022) ; Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Rubtsova et al. (2023) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) ; Guillen-Yparrea, & Ramirez-Montoya (2023a) ; Guillen-Yparrea, & Ramirez-Montoya (2023b) ; Kosman et al. (2024) ; Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) Digital platforms 15 68.18% Gómez (2010) ; Woicolesco et al. (2022) ; Carmona et al. (2019) ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) ; Dai (2021) ; Borger (2022) ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) ; Guillen-Yparrea, & Ramirez-Montoya (2023a) ; Guillen-Yparrea, & Ramirez-Montoya (2023b) ; Rubtsova et al. (2023) Pedagogical technologies and approaches 10 45.45% Rauer et al. (2021) ; Leiva et al. (2022) ; Jorgensen et al. (2022) ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) ; Carmona et al. (2019) ; Sarmiento et al. (2021) Educational resources 6 27.27% Zakharova et al. (2019) ; Leiva et al. (2022) ; Louahala (2023) ; Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya (2023b) ; Rauer et al. (2021) Social media 6 27.27% Woicolesco et al. (2022) ; Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Louahala (2023) ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) Productivity tools 4 18.18% Ciftci & Savas (2018) Not mentioned in the study RQ3. In which areas does research on the integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences focus, such as communication skills, cultural attitudes, and technological adoption? The analysis of the 23 studies included in this systematic review reveals a broad diversity of focus areas regarding the use of digital technologies to foster intercultural competences in higher education. However, there is a clear predominance of research centered on the development of communication skills, with a total of 14 studies (60,87%). This category includes works such as those by Borger (2022) , Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) , and Kosman et al. (2024) , which highlight the importance of virtual environments in strengthening intercultural interaction among students from different cultural contexts. For their part, Guillén-Yparrea and Ramírez-Montoya (2023a) emphasize that language teaching, international experiences, and collaborative virtual environments are the most common contexts for fostering such communication skills in higher education. In second place, technological adoption accounts for 21,74% of the studies (5 publications). This focus is linked to the strengthening of intercultural competences through both instrumental and critical mastery of ICT, including research such as that by Jørgensen et al. (2020) and Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) , who explore the integration and critical appropriation of digital tools in intercultural teaching-learning processes. Sociolinguistic and intercultural competences are addressed in 3 studies (13,04%), highlighting the need to understand linguistic and cultural codes in multilingual digital environments ( Leiva et al., 2022 ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a) . Other less frequent areas include teacher training (8,70%, 2 studies), curriculum internationalization (8,70%, 2 studies), and the development of cultural attitudes (8,70%, 2 studies), each reflecting specific lines of research focused on pedagogical design, cultural awareness, or the construction of global educational programs. Finally, categories such as critical thinking, pedagogy, learner autonomy, professional development in healthcare, and technical text translation each appear in only one study (4,35%), suggesting future opportunities to expand research in these less explored domains. Table 4 summarizes these results, highlighting the authors, thematic area addressed, study frequency, and their percentage representation within the analyzed corpus. Table 4. Research approaches to the integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences. Authors Focus area Frequency Percentage Borger (2022) ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) ; Carmona et al. (2019) ; McCloskey (2012) ; Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Jorgensen et al. (2022) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) ; Zakharova et al. (2019) ; Ciftci & Savas (2018) ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramirez-Montoya (2023a) ; Kosman et al. (2024) ; Louahala (2023) ; Rauer et al. (2021) Communication skills 14 60,87% Jorgensen et al. (2022) ; Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramirez-Montoya (2023b) ; Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) Technology adoption 5 21,74% Leiva et al. (2022) ; Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramirez-Montoya (2023a) Sociolinguistic and intercultural competences 3 13,04% Sarmiento et al. (2021) ; Gómez (2010) Teacher training 2 8,70% Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramirez-Montoya (2023a) Cultural attitudes 2 8,70% Rauer et al. (2021) ; Woicolesco et al. (2022) Internationalization of the curriculum 2 8,70% Jorgensen et al. (2022) Critical thinking 1 4,35% Villasol (2021) Pedagogy 1 4,35% Kosman et al. (2024) Professional development in healthcare 1 4,35% Louahala (2023) Autonomous learning in virtual environments 1 4,35% Rubtsova et al. (2023) Technical text translation and editing 1 4,35% It is important to mention that in several studies, the intercultural competences and areas of digital integration were identified as emerging benefits during the implementation of the interventions rather than as predefined pedagogical goals. This methodological ambiguity may affect the interpretation of the results and highlights the need for future studies with more explicit designs and structured pre-post evaluations. RQ4. Which intercultural competences are addressed? The results show that research on intercultural competences mediated by digital technologies in higher education is primarily concentrated in five dimensions: adaptation and management (47.83%), intercultural knowledge (39.13%), communication skills (39.13%), intercultural attitudes (39.13%), and collaborative work (21.74%). To a lesser extent, competences were identified in the areas of personal development (8.70%) and innovative leadership (4.35%), indicating emerging areas in the literature (see Table 5 ). Table 5. Intercultural competences addressed by the studies analysed. Dimension Percentage Competence Authors Construct according to authors Adaptation and management 47.83% Cultural adaptability Dai (2021) ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) ; Jorgensen et al. (2022) ; Kosman et al. (2024) ; Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) ; Woicolesco et al. (2022) Ability to flexibly modify behaviors and strategies when interacting with people from different cultures, while maintaining effectiveness in achieving objectives Adaptation to diverse contexts Rauer et al. (2021) ; Rubtsova et al. (2023) Ability to recognize and adapt to the implicit and explicit norms of different cultural environments, especially in professional settings Intercultural digital skills Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) ; Sarmiento et al. (2021) Competence to effectively use communication technologies in multicultural virtual environments, overcoming both cultural and technological barriers Intercultural knowledge 39.13% Intercultural awareness Borger (2022) ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramirez-Montoya (2023a) ; McCloskey (2012) ; Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) Understanding of one’s own and others’ cultural values, norms, and practices, recognizing their influence on perceptions and behaviors Cultural awareness Rubtsova et al. (2023) ; Kosman et al. (2024) Ability to identify and compare key cultural elements (e.g., individualistic vs. collectivist values) and reflect on their impact on interactions Global awareness Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; McCloskey (2012) Understanding global issues and their relationship with intercultural dynamics, considering historical and sociopolitical perspectives Communication skills 39.13% Intercultural communication Ciftci & Savas (2018) ; Zakharova et al. (2019) ; Dai (2021) ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramirez-Montoya (2023a) ; Rauer et al. (2021) ; Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) ; Woicolesco et al. (2022) Interactive process where people from different cultures exchange verbal and non-verbal messages, negotiating meanings with awareness of cultural differences Effective communication in intercultural contexts Zakharova et al. (2019) Ability to appropriately interact in multicultural environments by combining cultural knowledge, adaptability skills, and respectful attitude Intercultural attitudes 39.13% Intercultural sensitivity Ciftci & Savas (2018) ; Dai (2021) ; Leiva et al. (2022) ; McCloskey (2012) ; Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) Willingness to recognize, respect, and value cultural practices different from one’s own Empathy Leiva et al. (2022) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) Ability to understand and share the feelings of people from other cultures, especially in situations of conflict or intercultural stress Inclusion and welcoming Leiva et al. (2022) Proactive attitude towards creating environments that foster the equitable participation of diverse individuals Collaborative work 21,74% Global teamwork Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) Ability to coordinate efforts with geographically distributed multicultural teams, managing challenges such as time zones, language barriers, and diversity in work styles, communication, and decision-making Collaborative work Kosman et al. (2024) ; Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) Skill to co-create knowledge and solutions with peers from different cultures, integrating diverse perspectives through intercultural dialogue, meaning negotiation, and consensual creation processes Personal development 8,70% Reflection on identity Jorgensen et al. (2022) Critical self-awareness process that enables analyzing how one’s own cultural identity influences perceptions, prejudices, and ways of interacting in multicultural contexts Autonomy in learning Louahala (2023) Competence to actively manage one’s intercultural learning through selective resource seeking, comparative culture analysis, and continuous self-assessment of intercultural development Innovative leadership 4,35% Leadership and creativity Zakharova et al. (2019) Ability to design and implement innovative strategies that foster inclusion and high performance in multicultural teams, resolving intercultural conflicts through creative solutions The most recurrent dimension is adaptation and management, with cultural adaptability emerging as the most frequently addressed competence (n = 7), defined as the ability to flexibly adjust strategies and behaviors in multicultural contexts ( Dai, 2021 ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna, 2019 ; Jorgensen et al., 2022 ; Kosman et al., 2024 ; Savelyeva & Sazonova, 2024 ; Simoes & Sangiamchit, 2023 ; Woicolesco et al., 2022 ). Other relevant competences within this dimension include adaptation to diverse contexts (n = 2) and intercultural digital skills (n = 2), highlighting the growing need for technological competences to operate effectively in global and interconnected environments. Studies such as those by Sarmiento et al. (2021) underscore the role of digital tools in overcoming cultural and technological barriers, especially in virtual educational settings. Regarding intercultural knowledge, competences associated with intercultural awareness (n = 5), cultural awareness (n = 2), and global awareness (n = 2) were identified. These competences involve recognizing one’s own and others’ cultural values, norms, and practices, as well as understanding global issues from historical and sociopolitical perspectives ( Borger, 2022 ; McCloskey, 2012 ; Munoz-Escalona et al., 2020 ). Rubtsova et al. (2023) highlight the use of immersive technologies as a means of contrasting cultural and sociopolitical perspectives, thereby expanding critical understanding of cultural diversity. The dimension of communication skills was addressed in 39.13% of the studies, mainly through intercultural communication (n = 8), understood as a dynamic process of negotiating meanings between individuals from different cultures ( Ciftci & Savas, 2018 ; Zakharova et al., 2019 ; Dai, 2021 ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Rauer et al., 2021 ; Savelyeva & Sazonova, 2024 ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy, 2023 ; Woicolesco et al., 2022 ). Notable is the evidence of innovative methodologies such as COIL (Collaborative Online International Learning), which promote the construction of shared meanings in international academic environments ( Dai, 2021 ; Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ). With respect to intercultural attitudes, competences such as intercultural sensitivity (n = 5), empathy (n = 3), and inclusion and hospitality (n = 1) are emphasized. These competences reflect a positive disposition toward recognizing and valuing cultural diversity, which is crucial for inclusive educational environments ( Ciftci & Savas, 2018 ; Leiva et al., 2022 ; McCloskey, 2012 ; Munoz-Escalona et al., 2020 ). Recent works, such as that by Wiesner-Luna and Burgoa-Godoy (2023) , illustrate the potential of immersive technologies such as virtual reality to generate empathic experiences in the face of discrimination, demonstrating a transformative approach to intercultural training. The dimension of collaborative work emerged linked to competences such as global teamwork (n = 3) and intercultural collaboration (n = 2). These competences emphasize the ability to manage projects and build knowledge in diverse and geographically distributed environments, overcoming barriers such as differences in time zones, languages, or methodologies ( Kosman et al., 2024 ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy, 2023 ; Simoes & Sangiamchit, 2023 ). This highlights the key role of digital platforms in facilitating intercultural coordination in virtual spaces. Finally, although less represented, dimensions such as personal development were identified, including reflection on cultural identity (n = 1) and autonomy in intercultural learning (n = 1), as well as innovative leadership, with competences related to creative leadership (n = 1). Jorgensen et al. (2022) and Louahala (2023) highlight how reflective practices mediated by digital technologies strengthen cultural self-awareness, while Zakharova et al. (2019) explores the role of inclusive and creative leadership in hybrid educational contexts. The results reflect a growing field of research in which digital technologies are emerging as key tools for developing intercultural competences. Nonetheless, there remains uneven attention among the various dimensions, and opportunities are identified to deepen research in less explored areas, particularly in leadership and personal development, as well as in more diverse cultural contexts. RQ5. What are the limitations of the research? Of the 23 studies analyzed, 21 (91.3%) explicitly reported limitations in their research, while 2 (8.7%) did not mention any. To facilitate a clearer understanding of the results, the limitations were organized into six categories: methodological, sampling bias, technological barriers, communication barriers, institutional collaborative challenges, and pedagogical limitations (see Table 6 ). These categories reveal recurring obstacles that affect the validity, applicability, and generalization of findings related to intercultural competences mediated by digital technologies. Table 6. Limitations of the research analysed. Category Main limitations Authors Frequency Percentage Percentage by category Institutional collaborative challenges Difficulty finding partners Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) 1 4.35% 34.78% Lack of institutional response Woicolesco et al. (2022) 1 4.35% Lack of commitment from some team members Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) 3 13.04% Insufficient local cultural information McCloskey (2012) 1 4.35% Insufficient time Carmona et al. (2019) ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) 2 8.70% Methodological Small sample size Leiva et al. (2022) ; Jorgensen et al. (2022) ; Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya (2023b) 3 13.04% 30.43% Lack of sample diversity McCloskey (2012) 1 4.35% Qualitative approach without triangulation McCloskey (2012) 1 4.35% Lack of quantitative assessment (non-validated instruments) Woicolesco et al. (2022) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) 2 8.70% Sampling bias Lack of cultural diversity Villasol (2021) ; Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya (2023a) 2 8.70% 26.09% Exclusion of students Leiva et al. (2022) ; Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) 3 13.04% Inconsistent participation Zakharova et al. (2019) 1 4.35% Pedagogical Lack of teacher training Gómez (2010) ; Sarmiento et al. (2021) 2 8.70% 21.74% Lack of time for module development Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) 1 4.35% Pedagogical and logistical challenges McCloskey (2012) 1 4.35% Teacher ethnocentrism McCloskey (2012) 1 4.35% Technological barriers Problems accessing platforms Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Louahala (2023) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) 3 13.04% 17.39% Digital divide Sarmiento et al. (2021) 1 4.35% Communication barriers Language barriers Zakharova et al. (2019) ; Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) 2 8.70% 13.04% Difficulties in initial communication due to lack of early trust Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) 1 4.35% The most frequent category was institutional collaborative challenges (34.78%), encompassing limitations such as difficulty in finding institutional partners ( Simoes & Sangiamchit, 2023 ), lack of response from institutions ( Woicolesco et al., 2022 ), low engagement from some members of academic teams ( Munoz-Escalona et al., 2020 ; Simoes & Sangiamchit, 2023 ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy 2023) , insufficient local cultural information ( McCloskey, 2012 ), and lack of time to properly implement the modules ( Carmona et al., 2019 ; Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy, 2023 ). Secondly, methodological limitations (30.43%) included aspects such as small sample sizes ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023b ; Jørgensen et al., 2020 ; Leiva et al., 2022 ), qualitative approaches without data triangulation ( McCloskey, 2012 ), lack of quantitative evaluation using validated instruments ( Simoes & Sangiamchit, 2023 ; Woicolesco et al., 2022 ), and low diversity in samples ( McCloskey, 2012 ). These constraints compromise the robustness of methodological designs and the ability to generalize findings. Sampling bias accounted for 26.09% of the limitations, focused on the exclusion of students from research processes ( Leiva et al., 2022 ; Munoz-Escalona et al., 2020 ; Simoes & Sangiamchit, 2023 ), inconsistent participation of subjects ( Zakharova et al., 2019 ), and the lack of cultural diversity among participants ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Villasol, 2021 ). These limitations affect the representativeness and depth of intercultural analysis. Pedagogical limitations (21.74%) include lack of teacher training in digital tools ( Gómez, 2010 ; Sarmiento et al., 2021 ), logistical difficulties in designing and implementing intercultural modules ( Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy, 2023 ), pedagogical challenges in sustaining intercultural interactions ( McCloskey, 2012 ), and ethnocentric bias detected in some teachers ( McCloskey, 2012 ), which can hinder the construction of meaningful telecollaboration experiences. Technological barriers (17.39%) primarily involved difficulties accessing digital platforms ( Louahala, 2023 ; Munoz-Escalona et al., 2020 ; Simoes & Sangiamchit, 2023 ) and the existence of a significant digital divide in certain contexts ( Sarmiento et al., 2021 ), which limits equity in access and participation. Finally, communication barriers (13.04%) reflect challenges such as language barriers ( Simoes & Sangiamchit, 2023 ; Zakharova et al., 2019 ) and a lack of initial trust among students that hinders smooth interaction ( Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy, 2023 ). These limitations negatively impact the quality of intercultural exchanges in digital environments. RQ6. What are the future lines of research on intercultural competences? Of the 23 studies reviewed, 21 (91.3%) explicitly identify future lines of research related to the development of intercultural competences mediated by technology (see Table 7 ). These findings reflect a consensus within the scientific community regarding the need to continue innovating, evaluating, and contextualizing these competences in diverse educational scenarios. For analytical clarity, the proposals were organized into six thematic categories according to their frequency and relative incidence. Table 7. Future lines of research on intercultural competences. Category Percentage by category Reseach lines Key authors Frequency Percentage by frequency Assessment and metrics 82.61% Design of instruments to measure intercultural critical thinking Simoes & Sangiamchit (2023) ; Rauer et al. (2021) 2 8.70% Assess the impact of internationalization at home and interculturality in virtual environments Woicolesco et al. (2022) ; Guillén-Yparrea & Ramirez-Montoya (2023a) 2 8.70% Evaluate the effectiveness of digital pedagogical strategies in multicultural contexts Gómez (2010) ; Rauer et al. (2021) ; Munoz-Escalona et al. (2020) ; Guillén-Yparrea, & Ramirez-Montoya (2023b) ; Zakharova et al. (2019) 5 21.74% Analyze how digital intercultural experiences affect cultural identity perception Rauer et al. (2021) 1 4.35% Explore the sustainability and impact of technology-mediated intercultural competence training programs in higher education Rauer et al. (2021) ; Villasol (2021) ; Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) 3 13.04% Compare presential and virtual experiences in intercultural competence development Kosman et al. (2024) ; Kosman et al. (2024) 2 8.70% Evaluate intercultural competences through immersion and social interaction Carmona et al. (2019) 1 4.35% Longitudinal studies on employment impact Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) ; Dai (2021) ; Kosman et al. (2024) 3 13.04% Technopedagogical innovation 60.87% Integration of AI/gamification in intercultural environments Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) ; Rubtsova et al. (2023) ; Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) 3 13.04% Development of immersive (virtual/augmented reality) and/or innovative environments Jørgensen et al. (2020) ; Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya (2023a) ; Savelyeva & Sazonova (2024) ; Ciftci & Savas (2018) ; Villasol (2021) 5 21.74% Development of effective strategies to overcome logistical and ethnocentric barriers in intercultural interactions McCloskey (2012) ; Sarmiento et al. (2021) 2 8.70% Personalization of intercultural learning in hybrid or telecollaborative settings Dai (2021) ; Louahala (2023) ; Ciftci & Savas (2018) ; Guillén-Yparrea & Ramirez-Montoya (2023a) 4 17.39% Teacher training 30.43% Development of multicultural PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) Borger (2022) ; Villasol (2021) 2 8.70% Development of programs to strengthen teacher training in intercultural and digital competences Gómez (2010) ; Louahala (2023) ; Kosman et al. (2024) ; Leiva et al. (2022) 4 17.39% Training in COIL methodologies and telecollaboration Wiesner-Luna & Burgoa-Godoy (2023) 1 4.35% Specific contexts 13.04% Application in professional fields (healthcare, business) Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya (2023a) 1 4.35% Post-pandemic effects in higher education Villasol (2021) ; Woicolesco et al. (2022) 2 8.70% Institutional sustainability 8.70% Models for inclusive internationalization Woicolesco et al. (2022) ; McCloskey (2012) 2 8.70% Digital equity 8.70% Bridging technological gaps in regions with low connectivity Gómez (2010) ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna (2019) 2 8.70% The category with the greatest representation is Assessment and Metrics (82.61%), reflecting growing concern about improving measurement instruments and generating robust empirical evidence. Among the most notable proposals are the evaluation of the effectiveness of digital pedagogical strategies in multicultural contexts (21.74%) ( Gómez, 2010 ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Munoz-Escalona et al., 2020 ; Rauer et al., 2021 ; Zakharova et al., 2019 ), followed by longitudinal studies on the labor impact of these competences (13.04%) ( Dai, 2021 ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna, 2019 ; Kosman et al., 2024 ) and studies promoting interest in exploring the sustainability and impact of technology-mediated intercultural competence training programs in higher education (13.04%) ( Rauer et al., 2021 ; Savelyeva & Sazonova, 2024 ; Villasol, 2021 ). There is also a proposal to develop specific instruments for measuring intercultural critical thinking and assessing its effect on perceptions of cultural identity or direct social interaction. Secondly, Technopedagogical Innovation (60.87%) emerges as a priority area. Notable proposals include the development of immersive environments (21.74%) ( Ciftci & Savas, 2018 ; Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Jørgensen et al., 2020 ; Savelyeva & Sazonova, 2024 ; Villasol, 2021 ) and personalized learning in hybrid and telecollaborative modalities (17.39%) ( Ciftci & Savas, 2018 ; Dai, 2021 ; Guillen-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Louahala, 2023 ). These proposals point to the use of artificial intelligence, gamification, and innovative methodologies to enhance the intercultural experience in digital contexts. Teacher Training (30.43%) is consolidated as a strategic line for institutional strengthening. It is recommended to design training programs that integrate digital and intercultural competences (17.39%) ( Gómez, 2010 ; Kosman et al., 2024 ; Leiva et al., 2022 ; Louahala, 2023 ), as well as to promote the development of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in multicultural contexts (8.70%) ( Villasol, 2021 ; Borger, 2022 ). The categories of Specific Contexts and Institutional Sustainability appear in 13.04% of the studies. In the first case, applied research is suggested in professional areas such as healthcare and business ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ) and studies on the impact of the pandemic on higher education ( Villasol, 2021 ; Woicolesco et al., 2022 ). In the second, it is proposed to develop models that ensure inclusive and sustainable internationalization, especially in institutions outside traditional academic cooperation frameworks ( McCloskey, 2012 ; Woicolesco et al., 2022 ). Finally, Digital Equity accounts for 8.70% of the mentions, with proposals aimed at overcoming technological gaps in regions with low connectivity ( Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna, 2019 ; Gómez, 2010 ), highlighting the importance of ensuring equitable access to technology-mediated intercultural learning environments. These results demonstrate a dynamic field of study moving toward strengthening more inclusive, contextualized, and sustainable approaches for teaching intercultural competences in the digital age. Discussion RQ1. In which countries and/or regions is research concentrated? This systematic review shows that research on intercultural competences in higher education is primarily concentrated in the Americas and Europe, with significant contributions from countries such as Mexico, the United States, and Spain. This pattern aligns with the findings of Dores et al. (2025) , who report sustained growth in publications in these regions, driven by academic internationalization policies and the increasing demand for culturally competent professionals. In the European context, Milani and Portera (2021) highlight the institutional commitment to incorporating intercultural competence into teacher training, although they also point out methodological and pedagogical limitations for its effective implementation. Beyond the geographic pattern, the temporal analysis of the included studies reinforces this trend. Most of the reviewed publications are concentrated between 2021 and 2023, indicating a recent surge in academic interest in this topic. This increase could be linked to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which accelerated the implementation of international educational programs mediated by digital technologies and fostered reflection on the need for more interculturalized training ( Honen-Delmar & Rega, 2023 ; Rokos et al., 2023 ). The emergence of new modalities such as Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) and virtual exchanges has served as a catalyst for this type of research, particularly in countries of the Global North. On the other hand, although the presence of studies originating from Africa and Asia remains limited, significant experiences are emerging that broaden the geographical scope of the literature. A notable example is the study by Honen-Delmar and Rega (2023) , who document successful higher education semi-presential initiatives in refugee camps in Kenya and Malawi, focused on developing intercultural competences. These emerging initiatives, though still in their early stages, deserve greater visibility and recognition, as they provide valuable perspectives from diverse cultural realities. The evidence suggests the need to geographically diversify research, promoting more inclusive approaches that reflect the plurality of educational contexts worldwide. Regarding the temporal distribution, the exponential growth observed since 2019 (86.96% of studies) reflects the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which accelerated the adoption of digital technologies in higher education ( Basantes-Andrade et al., 2024a ; Kulich et al., 2021 ). This phenomenon has driven the exploration of digital methodologies to foster intercultural competences and highlighted structural gaps that limit their global implementation ( Ayazbayeva et al., 2025 ). While this research field demonstrates dynamism and global relevance, its progress continues to be influenced by geopolitical inequalities and its connection to specific technological contexts. Additionally, it is important to consider that the inclusion of studies exclusively in English or Spanish may have limited the geographical representativeness of the sample, favoring research originating from Latin America and Spanish-speaking countries. This linguistic bias may have influenced the predominance of Mexico and Spain in the results; therefore, future reviews could expand the language criterion to include other relevant languages, such as French, Chinese, or Arabic, to better reflect geocultural diversity. Although this study does not aim to perform a comparative analysis, the regional tendencies observed offer important interpretative insights. Research from Europe and North America generally emphasizes institutional innovation and structured digital infrastructures ( Dooly & Darvin, 2022 ; Wang et al., 2024 ), while studies from Latin America foreground socially inclusive and community-oriented practices ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ). African experiences, though still limited, underscore digital equity and resource accessibility ( Honen-Delmar & Rega, 2023 ). These tendencies suggest that technological integration in intercultural education is deeply context-dependent, reflecting diverse sociocultural priorities and infrastructural conditions across regions. RQ2. What types of digital technologies are used in the teaching of intercultural competences? The findings of this systematic review reveal a marked inclination toward the use of structured digital technologies in the development of intercultural competences in higher education, with a particular emphasis on learning management systems (LMS) such as Moodle, Blackboard, and Canvas. This preference, mentioned in 15 studies detailed in Table 3 , aligns with recent research highlighting the central role of these platforms in organizing content, facilitating academic interaction, and providing secure virtual environments that enable the progressive integration of diverse cultural perspectives ( Machwate et al., 2021 ; Oudat & Othman, 2024 ). The predominance of collaborative methodologies such as COIL (Collaborative Online International Learning) and blended learning in the reviewed studies aligns with previous research emphasizing the pedagogical value of structured virtual interaction as an effective means to foster intercultural competence ( Areskoug et al., 2022 ; Ayazbayeva et al., 2025 ). In this regard, experiences documented by Borger (2022) , Dai (2021) , and Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya (2023a , 2023b) coincide with the findings of Ayazbayeva et al. (2025) , who demonstrated that participation in virtual programs and digital intercultural activities during the pandemic significantly contributed to the development of communicative competence and cultural sensitivity among higher education students. This study confirms a significant relationship between digital competence and the ability to operate in intercultural contexts, especially in educational settings with structural challenges, such as rural areas. These findings align with research by Cabero-Almenara et al. (2023) , who found that teachers with higher levels of digital competence also exhibited more effective performance in intercultural situations, suggesting a critical interdependence between these two dimensions. This result reinforces the need to strengthen teacher training in educational technologies from an intercultural perspective. Likewise, Isaeva et al. (2025) emphasize the importance of integrating emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, gamification, and adaptive platforms to enrich the development of intercultural competences, particularly in contexts characterized by high cultural diversity or low connectivity. In contrast to the predominance of structured educational technologies such as COIL, blended learning, or LMS platforms in the selected studies, research by Rauer et al. (2021) and Louahala (2023) highlights the inclusion of social networks as a valuable alternative for developing intercultural competences. These studies demonstrate that tools like Facebook, virtual forums, and other social platforms can facilitate more spontaneous, horizontal, and culturally authentic interactions among students from different backgrounds. Despite this potential, the majority of the analyzed studies do not consider social networks as primary pedagogical resources, indicating limited integration of informal learning spaces. This underutilization has also been noted by authors such as Ngai et al. (2020) and Isaeva et al. (2025) , who argue that when appropriately incorporated into instructional design, social platforms can enrich intercultural learning, especially among young audiences accustomed to these digital environments. Finally, the review reveals a limited presence of studies in non-Western contexts, which constrains understanding of how digital technologies operate in diverse cultural settings. Research such as that by Dooly and Darvin (2022) and Ayazbayeva et al. (2025) underscores the need to adapt digital strategies to the specific cultural, social, and economic conditions of each region. Although structured technologies like LMS and formal methodologies predominate, there remains low incorporation of informal tools such as social networks and mobile applications, despite their high educational potential. Parks (2023) notes that integrating these everyday digital environments can foster a more critical, horizontal, and culturally meaningful pedagogy, especially for students in diverse contexts. From a pedagogical standpoint, these findings confirm that digital technologies not only mediate intercultural exchange but also embody specific educational philosophies. Structured tools such as LMS and COIL promote institutionalized collaboration, while informal technologies like social networks enable more horizontal and culturally authentic interactions ( Pei et al., 2023 ; Parks, 2023 ). This duality highlights the importance of critical digital literacy and intentional instructional design to balance institutional control with student agency and intercultural authenticity. RQ3. In which areas does research on the integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences focus, such as communication skills, cultural attitudes, and technological adoption? The results revealed that the most frequently addressed area in the integration of digital technologies for teaching intercultural competences in higher education is the development of communication skills, identified in 14 of the 23 studies reviewed. This trend reflects a prevailing understanding of intercultural competence as a practical ability for interaction and negotiation of meanings across cultures, aligning with the views of Parks (2023) and Kulich et al. (2021) , who emphasize that the foundation of effective intercultural education lies in linguistic and cultural communication mediated by technology. This emphasis is also supported by Guillén-Yparrea and Ramírez-Montoya (2023b) , who, in their systematic review, state that collaborative virtual environments and international experiences are the most effective settings for fostering intercultural communication skills. In this regard, technologies such as COIL (Collaborative Online International Learning) and hybrid learning programs have proven effective strategies for generating authentic interactions, as confirmed by studies such as those by Guo and Xu (2023) and Rubin et al. (2023) , which observed a significant increase in pragmatic competence in digital intercultural contexts. Technological adoption emerges as a growing area, present in five studies within the corpus ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Dugartsyrenova & Sardegna, 2019 ). This finding aligns with research by Liebech-Lien (2021) and Ayazbayeva et al. (2025) , who demonstrate that perceived usefulness, institutional environment, and teacher training are critical factors for successful technological implementation in culturally diverse contexts. These findings are consistent with those of Vilchez et al. (2023) and Dalle et al. (2024) , reinforcing the need to strengthen digital literacy as a pathway to more inclusive and culturally relevant education. Sociolinguistic and intercultural competences, addressed in three studies, indicate a trend toward more comprehensive approaches that go beyond mere verbal exchange. Das et al. (2025) and Lai et al. (2022) emphasize that the use of adaptive platforms and experiential pedagogical experiences significantly contributes to a deeper and more contextualized understanding of linguistic and cultural diversity in language teaching. This component is crucial for advancing higher education that, beyond teaching foreign languages, prepares students to interact sensitively and competently in global contexts. Other areas such as teacher training, cultural attitudes, and curriculum internationalization were less frequently addressed but remain highly relevant. For example, Rauer et al. (2021) and Woicolesco et al. (2022) document how digital tools can facilitate the integration of an intercultural approach into internationalized curriculum design—a perspective reinforced by Josefsson et al. (2022) , who highlight the potential of virtual exchanges to internationalize curricula beyond physical mobility. Studies such as those by Basantes-Andrade et al. (2024a) and Habib-Allah et al. (2024) stress the need to train teachers to integrate intercultural competence into their daily pedagogical practices, particularly in multilingual and digitally mediated contexts. Other emerging areas were identified, such as autonomy in digital learning, professional training in healthcare, critical thinking, and technical translation, although these remain underrepresented. These less frequently addressed topics indicate that the field is expanding but still requires greater systematization and analysis within specific disciplines. As Fütterer et al. (2023) and Basantes-Andrade et al. (2024b) point out, there is significant formative potential in the use of mobile technologies and social networks, especially for fostering more horizontal, spontaneous, and culturally situated interactions in informal digital spaces. Moving forward, it will be necessary to adopt interdisciplinary approaches that integrate digital competence, critical pedagogy, and cultural contextualization to advance toward more inclusive, global, and sustainable educational models. These findings reinforce the idea that intercultural competence cannot be developed solely through technical training but through pedagogical strategies that integrate empathy, reflection, and participation ( Dell’Aquila et al., 2023 ; Wang et al., 2024 ). Teacher education programs should adopt technopedagogical approaches that bridge intercultural objectives with participatory uses of digital platforms, ensuring that digital competence serves inclusion and ethical engagement rather than technological determinism. RQ4. Which intercultural competences are addressed? The findings of this systematic review reflect a panorama aligned with global trends in the study of technology-mediated intercultural competences, albeit with relevant nuances that enrich the understanding of the field. The high frequency observed in the dimension of adaptation and management coincides with recent studies emphasizing the growing need for flexibility and adjustment on the part of individuals in digitalized multicultural contexts ( Zhang, 2024 ). While Zhang (2024) underscores the importance of cultural adaptability in virtual environments, reviews such as that of Spencer-Oatey and Dauber (2021) continue to prioritize predominantly face-to-face contexts. This difference suggests a paradigm shift driven by virtuality—a phenomenon intensified during the pandemic, as demonstrated by recent research included in this review ( Jørgensen et al., 2020 ; Sarmiento et al., 2021 ). Moreover, studies such as that by Rubtsova et al. (2023) offer significant evidence on the use of immersive technologies for the development of these competences, contrasting with works such as that of Shadiev et al. (2024) , which remain focused on more traditional theoretical approaches. The predominance of intercultural knowledge in the analyzed studies aligns with findings reported by Deardorff (2020) , who, in her meta-analysis on intercultural competences in higher education, identified the cognitive component as predominant in 58% of research published in Q1 journals. This trend is further reinforced by recent studies, such as Basantes-Andrade et al. (2024b) , which highlight the relevance of cultural awareness and the understanding of social norms as key elements for professional integration in globalized contexts. However, authors such as Chuchón-Vilca and Ayala-Villar (2024) and Kramsch and Zhu (2022) warn of a persistent limitation: many educational programs tend to focus on distant cultures, particularly Anglophone ones, rather than engaging with cultures with which students have everyday interactions, potentially limiting the practical effectiveness of these competences. Regarding communication skills, the results of this review expand and nuance the findings of Shadiev et al. (2021) and Vande et al. (2022) , who position digital communication as the backbone of intercultural development, highlighting the role of tools such as social networks, collaborative platforms, and telecollaboration. In this domain, the methodological innovation of initiatives such as COIL (Collaborative Online International Learning) stands out. According to Guillén-Yparrea and Ramírez-Montoya (2023a) , COIL’s effectiveness surpasses that of more traditional virtual mobility programs, such as those reported by Hackett et al. (2023) , who documented substantial increases in the development of intercultural competences. This emphasis on experiential methodologies is consistent with the findings of Vargas et al. (2024) , who underscore that immersive virtual environments enhance fluency and communicative effectiveness in intercultural learning contexts. Concerning intercultural attitudes, the findings of this review partially coincide with those reported by Perry and Southwell (2022) , who identified a predominance of self-administered questionnaires as the primary strategy for measuring these competences. However, this review reveals more innovative approaches, such as the use of virtual reality by Wiesner-Luna and Burgoa-Godoy (2023) , which has been shown to induce empathetic experiences more effectively, validated through objective indicators. Likewise, Dai et al. (2025) highlight how intercultural sensitivity can be significantly enhanced through technologies such as virtual simulations, aligning with the conclusions of Wiesner-Luna and Burgoa-Godoy (2023) regarding the transformative power of virtual reality to generate empathy and cultural understanding. On the other hand, the dimensions of personal development and innovative leadership are the least explored within the analyzed corpus. Nonetheless, recent studies such as that by Melnyk and Koroban (2024) emphasize the potential of immersive technologies to foster inclusive and creative leadership, particularly in teacher training contexts, opening a promising line of research for the future. This finding is consistent with the proposals of Jørgensen et al. (2020) and Zakharova et al. (2019) , who stress the need to cultivate these competences to promote more inclusive, reflective, and transformative educational processes. These observations align with current global debates that conceptualize intercultural competence as a socially situated construct shaped by the interaction between technology, pedagogy, and local contexts ( Guillén-Yparrea & Ramírez-Montoya, 2023a ; Marginson, 2022 ). Emerging pedagogical approaches, such as immersive environments and AI-based simulations, have shown potential to cultivate empathy, critical reflection, and intercultural awareness. However, their effective integration requires a strong ethical and contextual foundation to prevent the reinforcement of existing digital and cultural inequities. Consistent with Pereira-González et al. (2025) , the ethical dimension of AI adoption in higher education must be explicitly addressed to ensure that technological innovation aligns with academic integrity, moral responsibility, and the preservation of intellectual autonomy. The results of this review confirm the growing relevance of digital technologies as strategic allies for developing intercultural competences in higher education and reveal areas that remain insufficiently explored, particularly in more reflective and leadership-oriented dimensions. The challenge persists to expand studies toward less represented cultural contexts, with the aim of building a truly global and equitable vision of intercultural learning. Although technological categories and frequently addressed intercultural competences were identified, there remains a gap in the literature regarding the specific correlation between particular digital tools and the competences developed. Except for some cases—such as the use of COIL to promote intercultural communication—studies rarely establish a direct relationship between the tool used and the competence achieved. This methodological limitation suggests the need for future research using experimental designs that can assess the differential impact of specific technologies (such as virtual reality, gamification, or social networks) on the development of competences such as empathy, global collaboration, or intercultural critical thinking. RQ5. What are the limitations of the research? The findings reveal patterns of limitations consistent with the international literature on technology-mediated intercultural education; however, this analysis also identifies critical nuances that expand the current understanding of the field. Methodological limitations and institutional collaborative challenges were the most frequently observed, results that align with recent reviews such as that of Guillén-Yparrea and Ramírez-Montoya (2023b) , who warn about the predominance of qualitative approaches without triangulation and the limited use of validated instruments in studies on digital intercultural education. This pattern was also identified in Deardorff’s (2020) meta-analysis, where 62% of studies exhibited internal validity issues. Nevertheless, this analysis detected a higher incidence of non-validated instruments specifically in studies with technological components, suggesting an emerging challenge in this subfield. This methodological deficit contrasts with recommendations from Jackson and Oguro (2018) , who advocate for standardized assessment protocols for digital environments. In this vein, there is reinforced support for adopting frameworks such as the “Intercultural Digital Competence Assessment Framework” proposed by Zarceño et al. (2024) , which combines validated quantitative metrics with contextualized qualitative analyses. A distinctive finding of this review is that institutional collaborative challenges surpassed technological barriers (34.78% vs. 17.39%). This differs from studies such as that of Parks (2023) , which identified digital infrastructure as the main barrier. The difference may be explained by the post-pandemic timeframe (2021–2024) of this review, a period during which the proliferation of telecollaboration initiatives intensified structural issues such as institutional disengagement, also documented by De Wit and Altbach (2021) . In response to these limitations, proposals such as the “staggered collaboration model” from Rokos et al. (2023) stand out, which suggest mandatory pilot phases and formal inter-institutional commitments. The coexistence of technological barriers and pedagogical limitations confirms the contradiction between technological mastery and the development of intercultural competences highlighted by Vilchez et al. (2023) . The results of this study add that, although teacher ethnocentrism is a less frequently reported barrier, it has a disproportionate impact on the sustainability of international collaboration projects, thus expanding on findings from Spencer-Oatey and Dauber (2021) , who focused primarily on student-related barriers. Regarding sampling bias, a concerning trend was observed toward excluding students from study designs, especially in the Latin American context. This pattern reinforces what was reported by Li (2023) , although our analysis indicates a higher regional prevalence (47% vs. 28%), consistent with the diagnosis of Dores et al. (2025) . This underscores the need to apply frameworks of geographical equity in intercultural research, as proposed by Milani and Portera (2021) . Finally, pedagogical limitations underscore the urgent need for more comprehensive teacher training. The evidence aligns with studies such as that by Dell’Aquila et al. (2023) , who recommend the simultaneous integration of digital and intercultural competences into teacher professional development programs. RQ6. What are the future lines of research on intercultural competences? The results show that 91.3% of the reviewed studies explicitly propose future lines of research, evidencing clear scholarly awareness of persistent challenges and emerging opportunities in the development of technology-mediated intercultural competences. This trend aligns with the findings of Basantes-Andrade et al. (2024a) and Deardorff and Arasaratnam-Smith (2021) , who emphasize the need for sustained innovation in the face of rapid technological and socio-cultural changes shaping global educational environments. The most represented category was Assessment and Metrics (82.61%), reflecting a methodological concern for generating solid empirical evidence and valid tools for measuring intercultural competences. This finding is consistent with observations by Sanz et al. (2023) , who highlight the scarcity of validated instruments in digital contexts. Similarly, Brunow and Newman (2020) , Guillén-Yparrea and Ramírez-Montoya (2023a) , and Peifer et al. (2021) insist on the need for longitudinal studies to evaluate the sustainability of intercultural learning and its long-term impact, particularly in programs such as COIL. In this regard, Lyu’s (2024) recommendation to conduct comparisons between face-to-face and virtual models is also relevant, considering the expansion of hybrid modalities in higher education. Proposals such as designing instruments to measure intercultural critical thinking and evaluating the effectiveness of digital pedagogical strategies in multicultural contexts are consistent with arguments by Zarceño et al. (2024) , who advocate for methodological frameworks that combine quantitative and qualitative approaches to comprehensively assess intercultural competence. Likewise, the importance of analyzing the professional impact of these competences has been emphasized by Kosman et al. (2024) , reinforcing the need for ongoing assessment beyond the educational environment. The second most represented category was Technopedagogical Innovation (60.87%), highlighting the development of immersive environments (21.74%) and the personalization of intercultural learning (17.39%). These lines align with recent research by Wang et al. (2024) , Dell’Aquila et al. (2023) , and Dai (2021) , who demonstrate the potential of technologies such as virtual reality, artificial intelligence, and gamification to simulate complex intercultural experiences and promote experiential learning. In line with this, Wiesner-Luna and Burgoa-Godoy (2023) emphasize the usefulness of immersive environments for fostering intercultural empathy. However, there is limited evaluation of the impact of these technologies in real application contexts ( Savelyeva & Sazonova, 2024 ), as well as scarce exploration of the use of informal spaces such as social networks, which contrasts with the contributions of Parks (2023) , who advocates for leveraging these environments as authentic scenarios for intercultural interaction. Regarding Teacher Training (30.43%), the results highlight the urgent need to integrate digital and intercultural competences into professional development programs. This need aligns with what Zarceño et al. (2024) have indicated, identifying gaps in teacher preparedness to face the challenges of technology-mediated intercultural teaching. Additionally, Dell’Aquila et al. (2023) show how integrated approaches in teacher training enhance effectiveness in international collaboration contexts. The strengthening of multicultural pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), as proposed by Borger (2022) , emerges as a key priority, complementing the call from De Wit and Altbach (2021) and Marginson (2022) to strengthen institutional support to overcome these structural deficiencies. Concerning Specific Contexts (13.04%), there is recognition of the need to apply intercultural competences in fields such as healthcare and business, consistent with the perspectives of Guo and Xu (2023) , who highlight the importance of transferring these skills beyond the academic sphere. Furthermore, research lines focused on the effects of the pandemic on higher education are identified, consistent with Kulich et al. (2021) and their analysis of exacerbated inequalities in post-COVID virtual environments. However, there remains low representation of non-Western contexts in the reviewed studies, contrasting with evidence documented by Honen-Delmar and Rega (2023) , who highlight successful intercultural practices in settings such as refugee camps. Institutional Sustainability (13.04%) emerges as a strategic dimension aimed at constructing models of inclusive internationalization. This vision broadens the traditional focus on international mobility ( Tight, 2022 ), proposing enduring collaborative networks that include institutions from peripheral regions. Finally, the category of Digital Equity (8.70%) addresses a key structural limitation: the persistent digital divide in contexts with low connectivity. This challenge has been highlighted by Vilchez et al. (2023) , who warn that without equitable access conditions, efforts to develop digital intercultural competences could exacerbate existing inequalities. The predominance of formal technologies (such as LMS) in the reviewed studies is questioned by authors like Basantes-Andrade et al. (2024b) and Vande et al. (2022) , who propose student-centered approaches and the use of more accessible and meaningful technologies. Likewise, the limited attention to the ethical implications of AI contrasts with the framework proposed by Luckin (2025) , who urges critical examination of algorithmic biases in multicultural educational scenarios. In alignment with recent debates on “inclusive internationalization” ( De Wit & Altbach, 2021 ; Marginson, 2022 ), these findings highlight the need for institutions to integrate virtual mobility, multilingual learning, and intercultural collaboration into curricular design. Doing so can promote equity and sustainability in international education policies while expanding access to global learning beyond traditional physical mobility. The future research lines analyzed reflect convergence with international trends but also reveal critical gaps in assessment, digital equity, and application in diverse contexts that require greater attention in scientific and educational policy agendas. Limitations This study presents certain limitations related to its temporal coverage (2005–2024) and linguistic scope (English and Spanish), as previously justified in the Methods section. The analysis was limited to peer-reviewed open-access studies indexed in Scopus, Web of Science, and SciELO, which may exclude relevant research published in other languages or non-indexed sources. Moreover, as a systematic literature mapping, the study focuses on identifying trends, methodological approaches, and research gaps, rather than evaluating the effectiveness of specific interventions. Future research should expand the linguistic corpus and employ longitudinal or experimental designs to strengthen empirical evidence and generalizability. Conclusions This systematic review demonstrates that intercultural competences mediated by digital technologies represent a dynamic and expanding field of research in higher education, particularly since the impetus generated by the pandemic. The dimensions of adaptation and management, intercultural knowledge, communication skills, and intercultural attitudes emerge as the most frequently addressed, reflecting the need to prepare professionals capable of performing effectively in global and multicultural environments. Nevertheless, significant gaps remain in areas such as innovative leadership and personal development, which deserve greater attention given their potential to transform educational processes toward genuine cultural inclusion. The findings also reveal a marked geographical concentration in the Americas and Europe, which limits the global scope of the phenomenon. Future research should therefore investigate underrepresented contexts, integrate innovative methodologies such as immersive technologies, and promote longitudinal studies to assess the sustained impact of intercultural learning. From a quantitative perspective, although structured teaching tools such as COIL, virtual classrooms, and learning management systems are widely represented, more flexible technologies, including social media platforms (27%), are also significant. This indicates a coexistence of formal and informal strategies in the digital mediation of intercultural competences, reflecting the diverse pedagogical approaches found across the reviewed studies. Overall, this review contributes to a deeper understanding of how digital technologies are consolidating as key instruments for the development of intercultural competences, offering new opportunities to design inclusive and culturally relevant educational experiences in higher education. Rather than proposing a definitive framework, this study offers an evidence-based reference foundation for guiding future research and informing institutional policies that promote inclusive, ethical, and digitally mediated intercultural education. Data availability Underlying data No data associated with this article. Extended data Figshare: The role of digital technologies in the development of intercultural competences in higher education: A systematic literature mapping (2005-2024), https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.7886789.v1 ( Basantes-Andrade et al., 2025a ). License: CC BY 4.0 . Reporting guidelines Figshare: Database: Digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences: systematic literature mapping. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.29452745 ( Basantes-Andrade et al., 2025b ). License: CC BY 4.0 Figshare: PRISMA 2020 checklist_Article. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.29374229 ( Basantes-Andrade et al., 2025c ). License: CC BY 4.0 Figshare: Flow diagram of the literature selection process according to PRISMA 2020. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.29373242.v1 ( Basantes-Andrade et al., 2025d ). License: CC BY 4.0 Acknowledgements The authors thank the Universidad Técnica del Norte (UTN) and the UTN-VLIR-OUS-PXL project entitled ‘Innovative practice-based International Training Programme (ITP) for teacher educators to promote educational inclusion while respecting intercultural identity’ for the institutional support provided for this study. They also acknowledge the use of Consensus, an artificial intelligence tool specialized in the review of scientific literature, which facilitated the identification and synthesis of relevant research, and ChatGPT (OpenAI), used for editorial suggestions and stylistic improvements of the manuscript. Both tools were used only for technical writing support and were not involved in the scientific analysis or interpretation of the results. This acknowledgment is made in compliance with the ethical principles of transparency in scientific publication. References Areskoug K, Haarr K, Eriksen S, et al. : Using Digital, Universal, and Intercultural Didactics to Improve Higher Education—A Project Protocol for a Norwegian Interactive and Collaborative Improvement Study Concerning Master’s Level Courses in “Theory of Science, Research Methods, and Research Ethics”. Frontiers in Education. 2022; 7 : 1–10. Publisher Full Text Ayazbayeva S, Mukushev B, Yessekeshova M: Shaping competence of intercultural communication during the COVID-19. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education. 2025; 14 (2): 810–879. Publisher Full Text Basantes-Andrade A, Naranjo-Toro M, Orye A, et al. : Inclusión educativa intercultural. Mapeo sistemático de literatura. Revista Conrado. 2024a; 20 (101): 9–17. Reference Source Basantes-Andrade A, Orye A, Naranjo-Toro M, et al. : Enseñanza culturalmente receptiva: Un enfoque pedagógico para promover la inclusión y la diversidad cultural. Universidad Técnica del Norte; 2024b. Reference Source Basantes-Andrade A, Bastidas-Amador G, Ruiz-Chagna C, et al. : The role of digital technologies in the development of intercultural competences in higher education: A systematic literature mapping (2005–2024). [Dataset]. Figshare. 2025a. Publisher Full Text Basantes-Andrade A, Bastidas-Amador G, Ruiz-Chagna C, et al. : Database: Digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences: systematic literature mapping. [Dataset]. Figshare. 2025b. Publisher Full Text Basantes-Andrade A, Bastidas-Amador G, Ruiz-Chagna C, et al. : PRISMA 2020 checklist_Article [Reporting checklist]. Figshare. 2025c. Publisher Full Text Basantes-Andrade A, Bastidas-Amador G, Ruiz-Chagna C, et al. : Flow diagram of the literature selection process according to PRISMA 2020 [Flowchart]. Figshare. 2025d. Publisher Full Text Borger JG: Getting to the CoRe of Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL). Frontiers in Education. 2022; 7 : 1–7. Publisher Full Text Cabero-Almenara J, Guillén-Gámez FD, Ruiz-Palmero J, et al. : Digital competence as a predictor of intercultural teaching effectiveness in disadvantaged areas: A structural equation model. Computers & Education. 2023; 198 : 1–17. Publisher Full Text Carmona M, Cruz V, García L: Desarrollo de competencias sociolingüísticas e interculturales en ELE: propuesta didáctica con blended learning. Comunicación. 2019; 28 (1): 16–30. Publisher Full Text Brunow B, Newman B: A developmental model of intercultural competence: Scaffolding the shift from culture-specific to culture-general. Criser R, Malakaj E, editors.Competence Past, Present and Future.2020b; pp. 139–156. Publisher Full Text Chuchón-Vilca J, Ayala-Villar SA: Right to Intercultural Education in Rural Communities. International Journal of Religion. 2024; 4 (2): 261–274. Publisher Full Text Ciftci EY, Savas P: The role of telecollaboration in language and intercultural learning: A synthesis of studies published between 2010 and 2015. ReCALL. 2018; 30 (3): 278–298. Publisher Full Text Dai Y: Blended Learning for Intercultural Competence: A Case Study in Engineering Education. Blended Learning for Inclusive and Quality Higher Education in Asia. 2021; 1 : 215–229. Publisher Full Text Dai DW, Suzuki S, Chen G: Generative AI for professional communication training in intercultural contexts: where are we now and toward where are we heading? Applied Linguistics Review. 2025; 16 (2):763–774. Publisher Full Text Dalle J, Aydin H, Wang C: Cultural Dimensions of Technology Acceptance and Adaptation in Learning Environments. Journal of Formative Design in Learning. 2024; 8 : 99–112. Publisher Full Text Das S, Poi S, Saxena S: Adoption and impact of AI-enhanced learning platforms in education. Forum for Education Studies. 2025; 3 (1): 1–28. Publisher Full Text De Wit H, Altbach PG: Internationalization in higher education: Global trends and recommendations for its future. Policy Reviews in Higher Education. 2021; 5 (1): 28–46. Publisher Full Text Deardorff DK: Manual para el desarrollo de competencias interculturales: círculos de historias. UNESCO; 2020. Deardorff D, Arasaratnam-Smith LA: Intercultural competence in higher education: Global perspectives. Routledge; 2021. Publisher Full Text Dell’Aquila E, Vallone F, Zurlo MC, et al. : A tailored MOOC fostering intercultural conflict management in the educational context: Evidence from Italy. Social Sciences. 2023; 12 (6): 1–14. Publisher Full Text Dooly M, Darvin R: Intercultural communicative competence in the digital age: Critical digital literacy and inquiry-based pedagogy. Language and Intercultural Communication. 2022; 22 (3): 354–366. Publisher Full Text Dores RM, Delgado-García M, Conde-Vélez S: Will higher education help develop intercultural competence? A systematic review in WoS and Scopus. Culture and Education. 2025; 37 (1): 143–159. Publisher Full Text Dugartsyrenova VA, Sardegna VG: Raising intercultural awareness through voice-based telecollaboration: Perceptions, uses, and recommendations. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching. 2019; 13 (3): 205–220. Publisher Full Text Farisyi S, Musadieq MA, Utami HN, et al. : A systematic literature review: Determinants of sustainability reporting in developing countries. Sustainability. 2022; 14 (16): 1–18. Publisher Full Text Fütterer T, Scherer R, Scheiter K, et al. : Will, skills, or conscientiousness: What predicts teachers’ intentions to participate in technology-related professional development? Computers & Education. 2023; 198 : 104717–104756. Publisher Full Text Gómez M: Competencias interculturales en instructores comunitarios que brindan servicio a la población indígena del estado de Chiapas. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa. 2010; 12 (1): 1–18. Reference Source Guillén-Yparrea N, Ramírez-Montoya M: Competencias interculturales en educación superior: Una revisión sistemática de 2016 a 2021. Cogent Education. 2023a; 10 : 1–15. Editorial: Texto completo. Publisher Full Text Guillén-Yparrea N, Ramírez-Montoya M: Una revisión de la colaboración a través de competencias interculturales en educación superior. Cogent Education. 2023b; 10 (2): 1–16. Editorial: Texto complete. Publisher Full Text Guo Z, Xu X: Understanding intercultural virtual exchange through a translanguaging lens in Chinese as a foreign language. Journal of China Computer-Assisted Language Learning. 2023; 3 (1): 132–167. Publisher Full Text Gutiérrez-Santiuste E, Ritacco-Real M: The role of communication in fostering intercultural competence in the classroom. Journal of Language and Intercultural Communication. 2024; 24 (1): 45–59. Publisher Full Text Habib-Allah MC, Pedreño-Plana M, Ibáñez-López FJ: La mejora de las Competencias Interculturales del profesorado. Una experiencia en acción. Estudios Pedagógicos. 2024; 50 (2): 205–221. Publisher Full Text Hackett S, Janssen JJWM, Beach P, et al. : The effectiveness of Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) on intercultural competence development in higher education: A quasi-experimental study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2023; 20 (1): 1–21. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Han I, Shin HS, Ko Y, et al. : Immersive virtual reality for increasing presence and empathy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2022; 38 (4): 1115–1126. Publisher Full Text Hei M, Tabacaru C, Sjoer E, et al. : Developing intercultural competence through collaborative learning in international higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education. 2019; 24 (1): 115–125. Publisher Full Text Honen-Delmar M, Rega I: Intercultural competence for peaceful communities: The role of blended learning higher education in refugee camps. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 2023; 97 : 101810–101891. Publisher Full Text Huang C, Lin L, Han X: Cultivating intercultural communication competence in university English teaching. Academic Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences. 2024; 7 (7): 134–139. Publisher Full Text Isaeva R, Karasartova N, Dznunusnalieva K, et al. : Enhancing learning effectiveness through adaptive learning platforms and emerging computer technologies in education. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Terapan Universitas Jambi. 2025; 9 (1): 144–160. Publisher Full Text Jackson J, Oguro S: Intercultural interventions in study abroad. Routledge; 2018. Jin Y, Sercu L: Approaches to Researching Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature (2018–2022) as a Platform for Improving the Design of Future Studies on Technology-Supported Interventions. Review of Educational Research. 2025; 1 : 1–10. Publisher Full Text Jørgensen M, Mason A, Pedersen R, et al. : The transformative learning potential in the hybrid space between technology and intercultural encounters. Journal of Studies in International Education. 2020; 25 (2): 227–244. Publisher Full Text Jorgensen M, Mason A, Pedersen R, et al. : El potencial transformador del aprendizaje en el espacio híbrido entre la tecnología y los encuentros interculturales. Revista de Estudios en Educación Internacional 2022; 26 (3):323–340. Publisher Full Text Josefsson KA, Haarr KH, Eriksen S, et al. : Using digital, universal, and intercultural didactics to improve higher education. Frontiers in Education. 2022; 7 : 1–10. Publisher Full Text Kholod S, Lebedeva T, Ivanova A: Intercultural communication in higher education: A model for developing students’ intercultural competence. International Journal of Educational Technology. 2023; 7 (4): 88–103. Publisher Full Text Kitchenham B, Brereton O, Budgen D, et al. : Systematic literature reviews in software engineering–a systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology. 2009; 51 (1): 7–15. Publisher Full Text Kitchenham B, Pretorius R, Budgen D, et al. : Systematic literature reviews in software engineering-A tertiary study. Information and Software Technology. 2010; 52 (8): 792–805. Publisher Full Text Klimova B, Chen JH: The impact of AI on enhancing students’ intercultural communication competence at the university level: A review study. Language Teaching Research Quarterly. 2024; 43 (6): 102–120. Publisher Full Text Kosman BA, de Jong DC , Knight-Agarwal CR, et al. : The benefits of virtual learning abroad programs for higher education students: A phenomenological research study. Nurse Education Today. 2024; 136 : 106133–106136. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Kramsch C, Zhu H: Reimagining the teaching of culture in foreign language education. Mod. Lang. J. 2022; 106 (2): 391–403. Publisher Full Text Kuffuor O, Aggrawal S, Jaiswal A, et al. : Transformative pathways: Implementing intercultural competence development in higher education using Kotter’s change model. Education Sciences. 2024; 14 (7): 1–20. Publisher Full Text Kulich SJ, Komisarof A, Smith LR, et al. : Re-examining intercultural research and relations in the COVID pandemic. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 2021; 80 : A1–A6. Publisher Full Text Lai C, Liu Y, Hu J, et al. : Association between the characteristics of out-of-class technology-mediated language experience and L2 vocabulary knowledge. Language Learning & Technology. 2022; 26 (1): 1–24. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73485 . Leiva JJ, del Olmo MJA , Aguilera FJG, et al. : Promotion of intercultural competencies and use of ICT: Towards a digitally inclusive university. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación. 2022; 20 (2): 21–39. Publisher Full Text Li C, Ip HHS, Wong YM, et al. : An empirical study on using virtual reality for enhancing the youth’s intercultural sensitivity in Hong Kong. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2020; 36 (5): 625–635. Publisher Full Text Li X: He who knows one, knows none: Pluralism in global higher education development. Higher Education. 2023; 86 : 1527–1532. Publisher Full Text Liebech-Lien B: Teacher teams–A support or a barrier to practising cooperative learning? Teaching and Teacher Education. 2021; 106 : 103453–103459. Publisher Full Text Louahala N: Developing learners’ intercultural communicative competence through online exchanges: Case of third-year students in Algeria. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Communication and Linguistics Studies. 2023; 1 (1): 156–170. Publisher Full Text Luckin R: Nurturing human intelligence in the age of AI: rethinking education for the future. Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal 2025; 39 (1):1–4. Publisher Full Text Lyu X: Theoretical and Practical Challenges in Assessing Intercultural Competence. International Journal of Social Sciences and Public Administration. 2024; 5 (1): 102–107. Publisher Full Text Machwate S, Bendaoud R, Henze J, et al. : Virtual exchange to develop cultural, language, and digital competencies. Sustainability. 2021; 13 (11): 1–16. Publisher Full Text Mara D: Intercultural competences of students-strategic approaches. MATEC Web of Conferences. 2021; 343 : 1–12. Publisher Full Text Marginson S: Space and scale in higher education: The glonacal agency heuristic revisited. Higher Education 2022; 84 (6):1365–1395. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text McCloskey E: Global Teachers: A Model for Building Teachers’ Intercultural Competence Online/Docentes globales: un modelo para el desa rrollo de la competencia intercultural on-line. Comunicar. 2012; 19 (38): 41–49. Publisher Full Text Melnyk O, Koroban O: The role of innovative technologies in the formation of intercultural competence of future computer technology teachers in vocational education in the conditions of internationalization. Collection of Scientific Papers of Uman State Pedagogical University; 2024; vol. 2 . : 104–111. Publisher Full Text Milani M, Portera A: Intercultural Education and Competences at School: Results of an exploratory study in Italy. Profesorado. Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado. 2021; 25 (3): 49–67. Publisher Full Text Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. : Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews. 2015; 4 (1): 1–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Munoz-Escalona P, De Crespo ZC, Marin MO, et al. : Collaborative online international learning: A way to develop students’ engineering capabilities and awareness to become global citizens. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education. 2020; 48 (4): 309–325. Publisher Full Text Neubauer E: Elementos de la competencia intercultural: Un análisis documental de la política educativa supranacional de la Unión Europea. Revista Complutense de Educación. 2022; 33 (4): 713–723. Publisher Full Text Ngai P, Yoshimura SM, Doi F: Intercultural competence development via online social networking: the Japanese students’ experience with internationalisation in U.S. higher education. Intercultural Education. 2020; 31 (2): 228–243. Publisher Full Text Nguyen H, Dolan H, Taylor S, et al. : Cultivating intercultural competences in digital higher education through English as an international language. Journal of Academic Language and Learning. 2022; 16 (1): 1–16. Publisher Full Text Nikiforova A, Skvortsova O: The development of intercultural competence in the context of education. Journal of Educational Research and Practice. 2021; 11 (3): 157–169. Publisher Full Text Oudat Q, Othman M: Embracing digital learning: Benefits and challenges of using Canvas in education. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice. 2024; 14 (10): 39–43. Publisher Full Text Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. : The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021; 372 (71): 1–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Parks E: COVID-19 and interculturality: Revisiting assumptions about intercultural competence and criticality development in modern language degree programmes. Language and Intercultural Communication. 2023; 23 (1): 88–104. Publisher Full Text Pei NM, Alias N, Dewitt D: Primary school pupils’ perception of VR technology in developing intercultural communicative competence in the Mandarin as a second language (MSL) course. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences. 2023; 11 (1): 1–12. Reference Source Peifer JS, Meyer-Lee E, Taasoobshirazi G: Developmental pathways to intercultural competence in college students. Journal of Studies in International Education. 2021; 27 (2): 1–11. Publisher Full Text Pereira-González L-M, Basantes-Andrade A, Naranjo-Toro M, et al. : Basantes-Andrade A, Naranjo-Toro M, Guia-Pereira M. Initial Validation of the IMPACT Model: Technological Appropriation of ChatGPT by University Faculty. 2025; 15 (11): 1–36. Publisher Full Text Perry L, Southwell L: Assessing intercultural competence: A systematic review of instruments. Higher Education Research & Development. 2022; 41 (3): 827–843. Publisher Full Text Petersen K, Vakkalanka S, Kuzniarz L: Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update. Information and Software Technology. 2015; 64 : 1–18. Publisher Full Text Rauer JN, Kroiss M, Kryvinska N, et al. : Trabajo en equipo virtual interuniversitario como medio de internacionalización en el hogar. Revista Internacional de Educación en Gestión 2021; 19 (3):1–13. Publisher Full Text Rokos C, Khapova S, Laumann M: Encapsulating holistic intercultural competence development in higher education. Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education. 2023; 15 (5): 157–174. Publisher Full Text Rubin J, Guth S, Helm F: Assessing the impact of virtual exchange on intercultural pragmatic competence: A large-scale study. System. 2023; 114 : 1–11. Publisher Full Text Rubtsova A, Zheleznyakova O, Anosova N, et al. : Collaborative learning in teaching culture studies to further training program students. Educ. Sci. 2023; 13 (7): 1–11. Publisher Full Text Sanz M, Orozco Gómez M, Llorente Á: Desarrollar y medir la competencia global en docentes: Una revisión sistemática. Revista De Iniciação à Docência. 2023; 8 (1): 1–22. Reference Source Sarmiento S, García K, Pozo O: Implementación de la metodología Lesson Study en el centro de apoyo San Vicente de Ecuador. Universidad Y Sociedad. 2021; 13 (5): 376–388. Reference Source Savelyeva NK, Sazonova NV: Contemporary state of the phenomenon “Digital Intercultural Competence” in pedagogical science. European Journal of Contemporary Education. 2024; 13 (1): 245–256. Publisher Full Text Schwarzenthal M, Schachner MK, Juang LP, et al. : Reaping the benefits of cultural diversity: Classroom cultural diversity climate and students’ intercultural competence. European Journal of Social Psychology. 2019; 50 (2): 323–346. Publisher Full Text Shadiev R, Wang X, Shen S: Effects of immersion and interactive strategies on students’ intercultural competence in virtual learning environments. Education and Information Technologies. 2024; 30 : 5883–5919. Publisher Full Text Shadiev R, Yu J, Sintawati W: Exploring the impact of learning activities supported by 360-degree video technology on language learning, intercultural communicative competence development, and knowledge sharing. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 12 : 1–18. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Sierra-Huedo ML, Foucart J: Intercultural and professional skills in student mobility to boost employability. Journal of Intercultural Communication. 2022; 22 (3): 1–12. Publisher Full Text Simoes AV, Sangiamchit C: Internationalization at home: Enhancing global competencies in the EFL classroom through international online collaboration. Education Sciences. 2023; 13 (3): 1–13. Publisher Full Text Sinoara R, Antunes J, Rezende S: Text mining and semantics: a systematic mapping study. Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society. 2017; 23 (1): 1–20. Publisher Full Text Spencer-Oatey H, Dauber D: Intercultural adaptation in face-to-face contexts: Revisiting traditional frameworks. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 2021; 84 : 102–115. Publisher Full Text Swartz S, Barbosa B, Crawford I: Desarrollo de competencias interculturales a través de la colaboración en equipo virtual en aulas globales. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly. 2020; 83 (1): 57–79. Publisher Full Text Tight M: Internationalisation of higher education beyond the West: challenges and opportunities–the research evidence. Educational Research and Evaluation 2022; 27 (3-4): 239–259. Publisher Full Text Vande M, Connor-Linton J, Paige R: Assessing intercultural competence in language learning. Modern Language Journal. 2022; 105 (4): 3–25. Publisher Full Text Vargas EG, Chiappe A, Durand J: Reshaping education in the era of artificial intelligence: Insights from situated learning literature. Journal of Social Studies Education Research. 2024; 15 (2): 1–28. Vilchez J, Ramón J, Cabrera V: Digital Competence And Intercultural Praxis Of Rural Secondary Education Teachers. Journal of Namibian Studies: History Politics Culture. 2023; 34 : 5266–5285. Villasol M: Rendimiento académico y patrones de uso del campus virtual: Un estudio de caso controlado. Revista Iberoamericana de Sistemas, Cibernética e Informática. 2021; 16 (1): 21–37. Publisher Full Text Reference Source Wang X, Zainudin SNFS, Yaakup HS: Intercultural communication competence among higher education international students: A systematic literature review. Migration Letters. 2024; 21 (4). Publisher Full Text Wiesner-Luna V, Burgoa-Godoy C: Experiencia de un aprendizaje colaborativo internacional entre instituciones de Educación Superior de Colombia y Chile. Praxis y Sabre. 2023; 14 (37):e15548–e15514. Publisher Full Text Woicolesco VG, Cassol-Silva CC, Morosini M: Internationalization at home and virtual: A sustainable model for Brazilian higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education. 2022; 26 (4): 222–239. Publisher Full Text Zakharova I, Kobicheva A, Rozova N: Results analysis of Russian students’ participation in the online international educational project X-Culture. Education Sciences. 2019; 9 (3): 1–11. Publisher Full Text Zarceño A, Agreda M, Ortíz A: Digital teaching competence and educational inclusion in higher education: A systematic review. Electronic Journal of e-Learning. 2024; 22 (1): 31–45. Publisher Full Text Zhang Y: Problems and strategies in college English intercultural communication competence education. Journal of Advanced Research in Education. 2024; 3 (4): 43–46. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 06 Aug 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, Imbabura, 100105, Ecuador 2 Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, Imbabura, 100105, Ecuador Andrea Basantes-Andrade Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Gabriela Bastidas-Amador Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Claudia Ruiz-Chagna Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Marlen Congo-Cervantes Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Gabriela Quintana-Andrade Roles: Data Curation, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (3) version 3 Revised Published: 01 Dec 2025, 14:772 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167364.3 version 2 Revised Published: 14 Oct 2025, 14:772 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167364.2 version 1 Published: 06 Aug 2025, 14:772 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167364.1 Copyright © 2025 Basantes-Andrade A et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Basantes-Andrade A, Bastidas-Amador G, Ruiz-Chagna C et al. Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167364.3 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 01 Dec 2025 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Ismailov M. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.192487.r437728 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3#referee-response-437728 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 02 Jan 2026 Murod Ismailov , University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.192487.r437728 Dear authors, thank you for the thoughtful and constructive responses. I appreciate the clear revisions and methodological clarifications provided throughout. I can now see that the justifications are coherent and strengthen your manuscript. The explanations regarding PRISMA adaptation, temporal trends, ... Continue reading READ ALL Dear authors, thank you for the thoughtful and constructive responses. I appreciate the clear revisions and methodological clarifications provided throughout. I can now see that the justifications are coherent and strengthen your manuscript. The explanations regarding PRISMA adaptation, temporal trends, data consistency, and category overlaps are clear and appropriate. I also value the corrections made to percentages, geographical classification, and technological categories. Overall, the revisions enhance transparency and improve the scientific rigor of your study. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: educational psychology, telecollaboration I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Ismailov M. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.192487.r437728 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3#referee-response-437728 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Sercu L. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.192487.r437727 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3#referee-response-437727 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 31 Dec 2025 Lies Sercu , Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.192487.r437727 Thank you for your revisions. My suggestion is ... Continue reading READ ALL Thank you for your revisions. My suggestion is to accept the manuscript in its current version. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: acquisition of intercultural competence; technology-supported promotion of intercultural competence I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Sercu L. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.192487.r437727 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3#referee-response-437727 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 14 Oct 2025 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Sercu L. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189102.r424819 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v2#referee-response-424819 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 13 Nov 2025 Lies Sercu , Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189102.r424819 1. Scope and Objectives : The article presents a systematic literature mapping (SLM) of studies published between 2005 and 2024 on the integration of digital technologies in teaching intercultural competences in higher education. It follows PRISMA 2020 ... Continue reading READ ALL 1. Scope and Objectives : The article presents a systematic literature mapping (SLM) of studies published between 2005 and 2024 on the integration of digital technologies in teaching intercultural competences in higher education. It follows PRISMA 2020 guidelines and includes 23 peer-reviewed, open-access studies in English or Spanish. While the scope is clearly defined, the rationale and research questions show some misalignment. The gaps identified in the introduction (e.g., lack of longitudinal studies, ethical implications of immersive tech) are not fully addressed by the six research questions, which focus more on descriptive mapping than critical analysis. There is a need to reframe the rationale and clarify the connection between gaps and questions. 2. Methodological Rigor The study combines PRISMA with the Petersen model, ensuring transparency in selection and classification. However, several methodological limitations weaken its robustness: Language bias: Only English and Spanish studies were included, excluding potentially rich literature in French, Chinese, Arabic, etc. Open-access restriction: This may have excluded high-quality but paywalled research. Lack of interrater reliability reporting: Although multiple reviewers were involved, no reliability coefficients are provided. Ambiguity in competence definitions: Terms like “intercultural knowledge” are treated as competences, which may require conceptual clarification. 3. Findings and Analysis The article offers a comprehensive overview of: Geographic concentration: 78% of studies from Americas and Europe, with Mexico, US, and Spain leading. Technologies used: LMS platforms (68.18%), COIL/blended learning (45.45%), social networks (27.27%), productivity tools (18.18%). Competence dimensions: Adaptation/management (47.83%), intercultural knowledge, communication skills, attitudes (each ~39%). However, the analysis remains largely descriptive, lacking deeper synthesis or critical engagement with how specific technologies foster particular competences. For example, the article notes the use of social media but does not explore its pedagogical implications in depth. 4. Novelty and Contribution The article’s main novelty lies in: Being the first systematic mapping (not a full SLR) of digital technologies in intercultural competence education. Highlighting underexplored areas such as innovative leadership (4.35%) and personal development (8.70%). Identifying a post-pandemic paradigm shift toward immersive, hybrid, and AI-enhanced learning environments. Emphasizing the coexistence of formal and informal digital strategies, with a call to better integrate social media and mobile apps. These insights are valuable for shaping future research agendas and policy frameworks, especially in terms of digital equity, teacher training, and assessment innovation. 5. Limitations and Areas for Improvement The article acknowledges several limitations in the reviewed studies: Institutional collaboration challenges (34.78%) Methodological weaknesses (30.43%) Sampling bias (26.09%) Technological and communication barriers Yet, the article itself could improve by: Providing examples to clarify abstract claims (e.g., immersive environments, pedagogical technologies). Avoiding overstatements about its impact (e.g., claiming to establish a reference framework without sufficient empirical grounding). Including more critical reflection on the ethical implications of AI and immersive tech. Conclusion This article makes a timely and relevant contribution to the field of digital intercultural education by mapping current practices and identifying critical gaps. Its novelty lies in its methodological approach and its emphasis on emerging technologies and underrepresented competences. However, to fully realize its potential, the study would benefit from greater conceptual clarity, broader linguistic inclusion, and deeper analytical engagement with the pedagogical implications of digital tools. Article that is missing from the review: Jin, Y., & Sercu, L. (2025). Approaches to Researching Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature (2018–2022) as a Platform for Improving the Design of Future Studies on Technology-Supported Interventions. Review of Educational Research , 00346543251353803. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Partly Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Partly References 1. Jin, Y., & Sercu, L. (2025). Approaches to Researching Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature (2018–2022) as a Platform for Improving the Design of Future Studies on Technology-Supported Interventions. Review of Educational Research, 00346543251353803. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: acquisition of intercultural competence; technology-supported promotion of intercultural competence I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Sercu L. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189102.r424819 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v2#referee-response-424819 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 04 Dec 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade , Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador 04 Dec 2025 Author Response Dear reviewer, We are truly grateful for the dedication and careful attention you invested in evaluating our manuscript. Your thoughtful observations and constructive recommendations have greatly contributed to strengthening ... Continue reading Dear reviewer, We are truly grateful for the dedication and careful attention you invested in evaluating our manuscript. Your thoughtful observations and constructive recommendations have greatly contributed to strengthening the methodological rigor, improving the clarity of the content, and refining the overall structure of the work. Below, we present a comprehensive, point-by-point reply to each of your remarks, detailing the specific modifications that have been made in response. Responses to Reviewer 4 We deeply appreciate your valuable feedback. Kind regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade Dear reviewer, We are truly grateful for the dedication and careful attention you invested in evaluating our manuscript. Your thoughtful observations and constructive recommendations have greatly contributed to strengthening the methodological rigor, improving the clarity of the content, and refining the overall structure of the work. Below, we present a comprehensive, point-by-point reply to each of your remarks, detailing the specific modifications that have been made in response. Responses to Reviewer 4 We deeply appreciate your valuable feedback. Kind regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 04 Dec 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade , Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador 04 Dec 2025 Author Response Dear reviewer, We are truly grateful for the dedication and careful attention you invested in evaluating our manuscript. Your thoughtful observations and constructive recommendations have greatly contributed to strengthening ... Continue reading Dear reviewer, We are truly grateful for the dedication and careful attention you invested in evaluating our manuscript. Your thoughtful observations and constructive recommendations have greatly contributed to strengthening the methodological rigor, improving the clarity of the content, and refining the overall structure of the work. Below, we present a comprehensive, point-by-point reply to each of your remarks, detailing the specific modifications that have been made in response. Responses to Reviewer 4 We deeply appreciate your valuable feedback. Kind regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade Dear reviewer, We are truly grateful for the dedication and careful attention you invested in evaluating our manuscript. Your thoughtful observations and constructive recommendations have greatly contributed to strengthening the methodological rigor, improving the clarity of the content, and refining the overall structure of the work. Below, we present a comprehensive, point-by-point reply to each of your remarks, detailing the specific modifications that have been made in response. Responses to Reviewer 4 We deeply appreciate your valuable feedback. Kind regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Yparrea NG. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189102.r424817 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v2#referee-response-424817 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 11 Nov 2025 Nicia Guillén Yparrea , Engineering and Sciences School, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Monterrey, Mexico Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189102.r424817 Dear Authors, I hope you are doing great. It was a pleasure to review your manuscript. I share my recommendations in order to improve its quality. Evaluation: 1. ... Continue reading READ ALL Dear Authors, I hope you are doing great. It was a pleasure to review your manuscript. I share my recommendations in order to improve its quality. Evaluation: 1. Validity of the Study The study addresses the timely and relevant topic of integrating digital technologies to develop intercultural competencies in higher education. Its theoretical foundation is solid and grounded in contemporary perspectives on interculturality and digital literacy. Using a systematic literature mapping (SLM) approach is appropriate for identifying trends and research gaps. However, the main research question and comparative scope across regions and disciplines should be clearer. This would strengthen the study's external validity and clarify its specific contribution to the broader field of intercultural digital education. 2. Data and Methods: The methodology is appropriate and described in sufficient detail. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are well-defined, and the analysis process follows the PRISMA 2020 recommendations. To enhance transparency, it would be useful to specify the screening procedure and justify the exclusion of studies in other languages. Including a supplementary table listing all analyzed articles would improve replicability and traceability further. Overall, the methods are rigorous and aligned with the open research standards promoted by F1000Research. 3. Interpretation: The results are well-organized and coherently interpreted. The paper effectively identifies patterns, gaps, and thematic clusters, providing valuable insights to the field. However, the discussion could be enriched by delving deeper into the pedagogical implications of digital tools for intercultural learning and by comparing the findings with those from studies in underrepresented regions, such as Latin America and Africa. Finally, a reflection on how the results can inform curriculum design or internationalization policies would enhance the paper’s applied relevance and theoretical impact. 4. Clarity and Presentation: The manuscript is clearly written and well-structured. The figures and tables are relevant and effectively support the narrative. Minor language editing is recommended to ensure consistency in terminology (e.g., intercultural competence versus digital intercultural literacy). Adding a short "Limitations" section before the conclusions, acknowledging temporal, linguistic, and methodological scope, would improve transparency. Please note that I used "DeepL Write" to improve the writing of this review. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Partly Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Intercultural Education, International Education, Educational Technology, Educational Innovation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Yparrea NG. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189102.r424817 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v2#referee-response-424817 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 04 Dec 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade , Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador 04 Dec 2025 Author Response Dear reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your insightful comments and constructive suggestions have been instrumental in enhancing the scientific rigor, clarity, ... Continue reading Dear reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your insightful comments and constructive suggestions have been instrumental in enhancing the scientific rigor, clarity, and overall coherence of the paper. Below, we provide a detailed, point-by-point response to each of your comments, indicating the specific revisions that have been incorporated into the manuscript accordingly. Reviewer 3's Responses Thank you again for your valuable review. We remain available for any further comments. Best regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade Dear reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your insightful comments and constructive suggestions have been instrumental in enhancing the scientific rigor, clarity, and overall coherence of the paper. Below, we provide a detailed, point-by-point response to each of your comments, indicating the specific revisions that have been incorporated into the manuscript accordingly. Reviewer 3's Responses Thank you again for your valuable review. We remain available for any further comments. Best regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 04 Dec 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade , Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador 04 Dec 2025 Author Response Dear reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your insightful comments and constructive suggestions have been instrumental in enhancing the scientific rigor, clarity, ... Continue reading Dear reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your insightful comments and constructive suggestions have been instrumental in enhancing the scientific rigor, clarity, and overall coherence of the paper. Below, we provide a detailed, point-by-point response to each of your comments, indicating the specific revisions that have been incorporated into the manuscript accordingly. Reviewer 3's Responses Thank you again for your valuable review. We remain available for any further comments. Best regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade Dear reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your insightful comments and constructive suggestions have been instrumental in enhancing the scientific rigor, clarity, and overall coherence of the paper. Below, we provide a detailed, point-by-point response to each of your comments, indicating the specific revisions that have been incorporated into the manuscript accordingly. Reviewer 3's Responses Thank you again for your valuable review. We remain available for any further comments. Best regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 06 Aug 2025 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Ismailov M. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184474.r407498 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v1#referee-response-407498 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 05 Sep 2025 Murod Ismailov , University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184474.r407498 This is a timely and relevant study that maps research on the integration of digital technologies into intercultural competence teaching in higher education. The topic is important and the dataset is valuable, particularly in highlighting trends since 2019. The use ... Continue reading READ ALL This is a timely and relevant study that maps research on the integration of digital technologies into intercultural competence teaching in higher education. The topic is important and the dataset is valuable, particularly in highlighting trends since 2019. The use of PRISMA brings transparency to the selection process, and the six research questions are well formulated. However, I see several areas where the paper needs clarification and corrections before it can be indexed. These relate mainly to methodological clarity, numerical consistency, and the alignment between results and conclusions. In its current form, some findings may be misleading to readers because of overlapping categories, unclear data handling, and inconsistent reporting. Major Issues 1 - Methodological concerns The paper calls itself a “systematic literature mapping” (SLM) but applies PRISMA 2020, which is standard for systematic literature reviews (SLRs). These two approaches have different purposes and levels of rigor. If PRISMA is being used for an SLM, please explain how it was adapted and why it was chosen over mapping-specific frameworks. 2 - Confusion with coverage period vs. actual results While the review covers 2005–2024, nearly 87% of the included studies are from 2019 onward. Was this due to a genuine lack of earlier research, or might the search strategy have favored recent publications? A short explanation would help readers interpret the temporal trends. 3 - PRISMA flow diagram promems The numbers don’t quite add up. You report 176 initial records and 5 duplicates removed, which should leave 171, but the screening stage starts with 155. Please check and correct the counts so the selection process is transparent. 4 - Check inclusion criteria consistency Inclusion criterion IC5 requires that studies integrate technology into intercultural competence teaching. At least one included study (Ciftci & Savas, 2018) does not clearly meet this requirement. If exceptions are made, they should be explicitly justified. 5 - Problem with percentage discrepancies For example, RQ3 states that “communication skills” is the focus of 42% of studies, but Table 4 lists 14 out of 23 studies (~61%). Please review all reported percentages to ensure they match the underlying data. 6 - competence dimensions overlap In RQ4, many studies appear in multiple categories (e.g., communication skills and intercultural attitudes). This is fine, but the paper should clarify whether percentages are exclusive or overlapping so readers understand how totals are calculated. 7 - Geographic mis-classification? Scotland is listed separately from the United Kingdom, which inflates diversity counts. Unless a study explicitly treats Scotland as separate from the UK, these should be merged for consistency. 8 - Another overlap - Technology category Some tools (e.g., COIL) are counted in more than one category, which can inflate category frequencies. Please define clear, mutually exclusive categories or explain why overlaps are reported. 9 - Mismatch between your results and conclusions The conclusion states there is a “clear preference for structured teaching tools,” but 27% of studies use social media, which is not negligible. This should be discussed so conclusions reflect the actual distribution. 10 - Peer review compliance issue Some included works (e.g., Munoz-Escalona et al., 2020) may not clearly meet the “peer-reviewed” criterion. Please verify the status of each study and remove any that do not meet IC2. Other technical / presentation issues. Please: Clarify why an SLM is using PRISMA and how it was adapted. Ensure all PRISMA counts match the narrative. Recalculate and correct all percentages. State clearly if competence dimension percentages are overlapping or exclusive. Standardize country/region reporting. Double-check that all included studies meet the stated inclusion criteria. Define mutually exclusive technology categories. Add clearer figure/table legends, especially for calculation bases. Include a breakdown of methodological quality scores for each study. Link each conclusion directly to quantitative evidence from the results. My recommendation - Major Revision – The study has some value, but key methodological and reporting issues must be addressed. I would like the authors to correct the numerical inconsistencies / clarify overlaps, / align conclusions more closely with the data ... these should somewhat strengthen the paper. Good luck. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Partly Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Partly If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: telecollaboration, intercultural communication, digital learning I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Ismailov M. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184474.r407498 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v1#referee-response-407498 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 14 Oct 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade , Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador 14 Oct 2025 Author Response Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to evaluating our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have been extremely valuable in strengthening the scientific quality, clarity, ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to evaluating our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have been extremely valuable in strengthening the scientific quality, clarity, and overall coherence of the work. Below, we provide a detailed response to each of your comments, indicating the revisions incorporated into the manuscript and, where applicable, the justification for maintaining the original wording. https://f1000research-files.f1000.com/linked/754109.Reviewer_2%27s_Responses.docx Sincerely, PhD. Andrea Basantes Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to evaluating our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have been extremely valuable in strengthening the scientific quality, clarity, and overall coherence of the work. Below, we provide a detailed response to each of your comments, indicating the revisions incorporated into the manuscript and, where applicable, the justification for maintaining the original wording. https://f1000research-files.f1000.com/linked/754109.Reviewer_2%27s_Responses.docx Sincerely, PhD. Andrea Basantes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 14 Oct 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade , Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador 14 Oct 2025 Author Response Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to evaluating our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have been extremely valuable in strengthening the scientific quality, clarity, ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to evaluating our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have been extremely valuable in strengthening the scientific quality, clarity, and overall coherence of the work. Below, we provide a detailed response to each of your comments, indicating the revisions incorporated into the manuscript and, where applicable, the justification for maintaining the original wording. https://f1000research-files.f1000.com/linked/754109.Reviewer_2%27s_Responses.docx Sincerely, PhD. Andrea Basantes Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to evaluating our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have been extremely valuable in strengthening the scientific quality, clarity, and overall coherence of the work. Below, we provide a detailed response to each of your comments, indicating the revisions incorporated into the manuscript and, where applicable, the justification for maintaining the original wording. https://f1000research-files.f1000.com/linked/754109.Reviewer_2%27s_Responses.docx Sincerely, PhD. Andrea Basantes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Korosidou E. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184474.r404966 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v1#referee-response-404966 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 25 Aug 2025 Eleni Korosidou , University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184474.r404966 This is a well-written study that makes a valuable contribution to understanding the integration of digital technologies in intercultural teaching, offering a solid basis for further research in the field. However, the following aspects merit consideration to reinforce the ... Continue reading READ ALL This is a well-written study that makes a valuable contribution to understanding the integration of digital technologies in intercultural teaching, offering a solid basis for further research in the field. However, the following aspects merit consideration to reinforce the study. The inclusion criterion IC1, “Scientific articles written in English or Spanish,” may have influenced the results for RQ1, as the concentration of research in the Americas and Europe could be partly explained by the acceptance of Spanish-language publications. The finding that Mexico leads scientific production with 15% (n=4), followed by the United States, Spain, and Russia with 11% each (n=3), should therefore be acknowledged as potentially shaped by language-based inclusion. The inclusion of Ciftci and Savas (2018) also appears problematic, since the study emphasizes the benefits of technologies in intercultural teaching but does not specify the use of particular digital tools, raising questions about consistency with the criteria. For RQ3, it remains unclear whether the reported areas of digital technology integration (communication skills, cultural attitudes, and technological adoption) were deliberately targeted in the interventions or whether they emerged as benefits observed during implementation. A similar lack of clarity is noted in RQ4 with respect to intercultural competences: it is not evident whether these were explicitly addressed in the design of interventions or whether they developed incidentally during the research process. Finally, the potential influence of specific digital tools on the development of particular competences is not sufficiently addressed, and further insights in this direction would strengthen the study. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Yes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Intercultural communication skills and strategies, Language Teaching and Learning, ICT integration I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Korosidou E. Reviewer Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184474.r404966 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v1#referee-response-404966 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 14 Oct 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade , Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador 14 Oct 2025 Author Response Dear Reviewer, Warm greetings. We sincerely thank you for the time dedicated to reviewing our manuscript entitled “Integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences: systematic literature mapping” , ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, Warm greetings. We sincerely thank you for the time dedicated to reviewing our manuscript entitled “Integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences: systematic literature mapping” , and for your valuable comments, which have allowed us to strengthen the quality and rigor of the study. Below, we provide detailed responses to each of the comments received: Comment 1: The inclusion criterion IC1, “Scientific articles written in English or Spanish,” may have influenced the concentration of research in the Americas and Europe, thus affecting the findings for RQ1. Response: We agree that the adopted language criterion (IC1) may have partially influenced the results of RQ1. We acknowledge that the inclusion of publications in Spanish may have favored the representation of studies from Latin American contexts, especially from Mexico and South America. This limitation has been added as a critical observation in the discussion section, in order to make transparent the possible linguistic-geographical bias in the analyzed sample. Incorporated explanatory text in the discussion section (at the end of RQ1): Additionally, it is important to consider that the inclusion of studies exclusively in English or Spanish may have limited the geographical representativeness of the sample, favoring research originating from Latin America and Spanish-speaking countries. This linguistic bias may have influenced the predominance of Mexico and Spain in the results; therefore, future reviews could expand the language criterion to include other relevant languages, such as French, Chinese, or Arabic, to better reflect geocultural diversity. Comment 2: The inclusion of the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) appears problematic, as it does not specify particular digital tools. Response: After reexamining the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018), we agree that, although it addresses intercultural teaching in digitally mediated contexts, it does not specify particular digital technologies, which raises questions about its alignment with criterion IC5. Therefore, we have marked this case as an exception in the results section and have revised its treatment to clearly distinguish it from studies that do report specific digital tools. Text added in the article (in RQ2): It is worth noting that the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) constitutes an exception, as it recognizes the benefits of using technologies in intercultural contexts but does not describe specific digital tools implemented in the intervention. This limits its comparability with other studies in the corpus and should be considered a methodological limitation in the interpretation of the results. Comment 3: In RQ3 and RQ4, it is unclear whether the competences and areas were explicit objectives of the interventions or emerged as incidental outcomes. Response: We acknowledge that not all studies in the corpus clearly differentiated between competences explicitly targeted in the pedagogical design and those that emerged during the implementation process. This distinction has been added to the corresponding sections, along with a methodological note in the data extraction section, indicating how both types of findings were recorded. Text added in the article, in the Methods section (end of 2.4): It is important to note that during data extraction, both competences and focus areas explicitly stated in the objectives or methodological designs of the studies, as well as those that emerged as observed outcomes or later reflections, were recorded. This distinction was maintained in the analysis matrices, although not all studies clearly differentiated between these levels. Text added at the end of RQ3: It is important to mention that in several studies, the intercultural competences and areas of digital integration were identified as emerging benefits during the implementation of the interventions rather than as predefined pedagogical goals. This methodological ambiguity may affect the interpretation of the results and highlights the need for future studies with more explicit designs and structured pre-post evaluations. Comment 4: The potential influence of specific digital tools on the development of particular competences is not sufficiently addressed. Response: We highly value this observation, which has allowed us to enrich the analysis. We have incorporated an additional reflection in the discussion section, addressing the need for deeper investigation into the correspondence between types of digital tools and specific intercultural competences—particularly in teaching contexts mediated by emerging technologies such as immersive environments or social networks. Text added in the article, in the Discussion section (after RQ4): Although technological categories and frequently addressed intercultural competences were identified, there remains a gap in the literature regarding the specific correlation between particular digital tools and the competences developed. Except for some cases—such as the use of COIL to promote intercultural communication—studies rarely establish a direct relationship between the tool used and the competence achieved. This methodological limitation suggests the need for future research using experimental designs that can assess the differential impact of specific technologies (such as virtual reality, gamification, or social networks) on the development of competences such as empathy, global collaboration, or intercultural critical thinking. Once again, we sincerely thank you for your suggestions, which have significantly enriched the manuscript and helped us to reinforce its conceptual and methodological soundness. We remain attentive to any further comments you may wish to share. Sincerely, Dr. Andrea Basantes-Andrade On behalf of the author team Universidad Técnica del Norte [email protected] Dear Reviewer, Warm greetings. We sincerely thank you for the time dedicated to reviewing our manuscript entitled “Integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences: systematic literature mapping” , and for your valuable comments, which have allowed us to strengthen the quality and rigor of the study. Below, we provide detailed responses to each of the comments received: Comment 1: The inclusion criterion IC1, “Scientific articles written in English or Spanish,” may have influenced the concentration of research in the Americas and Europe, thus affecting the findings for RQ1. Response: We agree that the adopted language criterion (IC1) may have partially influenced the results of RQ1. We acknowledge that the inclusion of publications in Spanish may have favored the representation of studies from Latin American contexts, especially from Mexico and South America. This limitation has been added as a critical observation in the discussion section, in order to make transparent the possible linguistic-geographical bias in the analyzed sample. Incorporated explanatory text in the discussion section (at the end of RQ1): Additionally, it is important to consider that the inclusion of studies exclusively in English or Spanish may have limited the geographical representativeness of the sample, favoring research originating from Latin America and Spanish-speaking countries. This linguistic bias may have influenced the predominance of Mexico and Spain in the results; therefore, future reviews could expand the language criterion to include other relevant languages, such as French, Chinese, or Arabic, to better reflect geocultural diversity. Comment 2: The inclusion of the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) appears problematic, as it does not specify particular digital tools. Response: After reexamining the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018), we agree that, although it addresses intercultural teaching in digitally mediated contexts, it does not specify particular digital technologies, which raises questions about its alignment with criterion IC5. Therefore, we have marked this case as an exception in the results section and have revised its treatment to clearly distinguish it from studies that do report specific digital tools. Text added in the article (in RQ2): It is worth noting that the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) constitutes an exception, as it recognizes the benefits of using technologies in intercultural contexts but does not describe specific digital tools implemented in the intervention. This limits its comparability with other studies in the corpus and should be considered a methodological limitation in the interpretation of the results. Comment 3: In RQ3 and RQ4, it is unclear whether the competences and areas were explicit objectives of the interventions or emerged as incidental outcomes. Response: We acknowledge that not all studies in the corpus clearly differentiated between competences explicitly targeted in the pedagogical design and those that emerged during the implementation process. This distinction has been added to the corresponding sections, along with a methodological note in the data extraction section, indicating how both types of findings were recorded. Text added in the article, in the Methods section (end of 2.4): It is important to note that during data extraction, both competences and focus areas explicitly stated in the objectives or methodological designs of the studies, as well as those that emerged as observed outcomes or later reflections, were recorded. This distinction was maintained in the analysis matrices, although not all studies clearly differentiated between these levels. Text added at the end of RQ3: It is important to mention that in several studies, the intercultural competences and areas of digital integration were identified as emerging benefits during the implementation of the interventions rather than as predefined pedagogical goals. This methodological ambiguity may affect the interpretation of the results and highlights the need for future studies with more explicit designs and structured pre-post evaluations. Comment 4: The potential influence of specific digital tools on the development of particular competences is not sufficiently addressed. Response: We highly value this observation, which has allowed us to enrich the analysis. We have incorporated an additional reflection in the discussion section, addressing the need for deeper investigation into the correspondence between types of digital tools and specific intercultural competences—particularly in teaching contexts mediated by emerging technologies such as immersive environments or social networks. Text added in the article, in the Discussion section (after RQ4): Although technological categories and frequently addressed intercultural competences were identified, there remains a gap in the literature regarding the specific correlation between particular digital tools and the competences developed. Except for some cases—such as the use of COIL to promote intercultural communication—studies rarely establish a direct relationship between the tool used and the competence achieved. This methodological limitation suggests the need for future research using experimental designs that can assess the differential impact of specific technologies (such as virtual reality, gamification, or social networks) on the development of competences such as empathy, global collaboration, or intercultural critical thinking. Once again, we sincerely thank you for your suggestions, which have significantly enriched the manuscript and helped us to reinforce its conceptual and methodological soundness. We remain attentive to any further comments you may wish to share. Sincerely, Dr. Andrea Basantes-Andrade On behalf of the author team Universidad Técnica del Norte [email protected] Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 14 Oct 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade , Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador 14 Oct 2025 Author Response Dear Reviewer, Warm greetings. We sincerely thank you for the time dedicated to reviewing our manuscript entitled “Integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences: systematic literature mapping” , ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, Warm greetings. We sincerely thank you for the time dedicated to reviewing our manuscript entitled “Integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences: systematic literature mapping” , and for your valuable comments, which have allowed us to strengthen the quality and rigor of the study. Below, we provide detailed responses to each of the comments received: Comment 1: The inclusion criterion IC1, “Scientific articles written in English or Spanish,” may have influenced the concentration of research in the Americas and Europe, thus affecting the findings for RQ1. Response: We agree that the adopted language criterion (IC1) may have partially influenced the results of RQ1. We acknowledge that the inclusion of publications in Spanish may have favored the representation of studies from Latin American contexts, especially from Mexico and South America. This limitation has been added as a critical observation in the discussion section, in order to make transparent the possible linguistic-geographical bias in the analyzed sample. Incorporated explanatory text in the discussion section (at the end of RQ1): Additionally, it is important to consider that the inclusion of studies exclusively in English or Spanish may have limited the geographical representativeness of the sample, favoring research originating from Latin America and Spanish-speaking countries. This linguistic bias may have influenced the predominance of Mexico and Spain in the results; therefore, future reviews could expand the language criterion to include other relevant languages, such as French, Chinese, or Arabic, to better reflect geocultural diversity. Comment 2: The inclusion of the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) appears problematic, as it does not specify particular digital tools. Response: After reexamining the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018), we agree that, although it addresses intercultural teaching in digitally mediated contexts, it does not specify particular digital technologies, which raises questions about its alignment with criterion IC5. Therefore, we have marked this case as an exception in the results section and have revised its treatment to clearly distinguish it from studies that do report specific digital tools. Text added in the article (in RQ2): It is worth noting that the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) constitutes an exception, as it recognizes the benefits of using technologies in intercultural contexts but does not describe specific digital tools implemented in the intervention. This limits its comparability with other studies in the corpus and should be considered a methodological limitation in the interpretation of the results. Comment 3: In RQ3 and RQ4, it is unclear whether the competences and areas were explicit objectives of the interventions or emerged as incidental outcomes. Response: We acknowledge that not all studies in the corpus clearly differentiated between competences explicitly targeted in the pedagogical design and those that emerged during the implementation process. This distinction has been added to the corresponding sections, along with a methodological note in the data extraction section, indicating how both types of findings were recorded. Text added in the article, in the Methods section (end of 2.4): It is important to note that during data extraction, both competences and focus areas explicitly stated in the objectives or methodological designs of the studies, as well as those that emerged as observed outcomes or later reflections, were recorded. This distinction was maintained in the analysis matrices, although not all studies clearly differentiated between these levels. Text added at the end of RQ3: It is important to mention that in several studies, the intercultural competences and areas of digital integration were identified as emerging benefits during the implementation of the interventions rather than as predefined pedagogical goals. This methodological ambiguity may affect the interpretation of the results and highlights the need for future studies with more explicit designs and structured pre-post evaluations. Comment 4: The potential influence of specific digital tools on the development of particular competences is not sufficiently addressed. Response: We highly value this observation, which has allowed us to enrich the analysis. We have incorporated an additional reflection in the discussion section, addressing the need for deeper investigation into the correspondence between types of digital tools and specific intercultural competences—particularly in teaching contexts mediated by emerging technologies such as immersive environments or social networks. Text added in the article, in the Discussion section (after RQ4): Although technological categories and frequently addressed intercultural competences were identified, there remains a gap in the literature regarding the specific correlation between particular digital tools and the competences developed. Except for some cases—such as the use of COIL to promote intercultural communication—studies rarely establish a direct relationship between the tool used and the competence achieved. This methodological limitation suggests the need for future research using experimental designs that can assess the differential impact of specific technologies (such as virtual reality, gamification, or social networks) on the development of competences such as empathy, global collaboration, or intercultural critical thinking. Once again, we sincerely thank you for your suggestions, which have significantly enriched the manuscript and helped us to reinforce its conceptual and methodological soundness. We remain attentive to any further comments you may wish to share. Sincerely, Dr. Andrea Basantes-Andrade On behalf of the author team Universidad Técnica del Norte [email protected] Dear Reviewer, Warm greetings. We sincerely thank you for the time dedicated to reviewing our manuscript entitled “Integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences: systematic literature mapping” , and for your valuable comments, which have allowed us to strengthen the quality and rigor of the study. Below, we provide detailed responses to each of the comments received: Comment 1: The inclusion criterion IC1, “Scientific articles written in English or Spanish,” may have influenced the concentration of research in the Americas and Europe, thus affecting the findings for RQ1. Response: We agree that the adopted language criterion (IC1) may have partially influenced the results of RQ1. We acknowledge that the inclusion of publications in Spanish may have favored the representation of studies from Latin American contexts, especially from Mexico and South America. This limitation has been added as a critical observation in the discussion section, in order to make transparent the possible linguistic-geographical bias in the analyzed sample. Incorporated explanatory text in the discussion section (at the end of RQ1): Additionally, it is important to consider that the inclusion of studies exclusively in English or Spanish may have limited the geographical representativeness of the sample, favoring research originating from Latin America and Spanish-speaking countries. This linguistic bias may have influenced the predominance of Mexico and Spain in the results; therefore, future reviews could expand the language criterion to include other relevant languages, such as French, Chinese, or Arabic, to better reflect geocultural diversity. Comment 2: The inclusion of the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) appears problematic, as it does not specify particular digital tools. Response: After reexamining the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018), we agree that, although it addresses intercultural teaching in digitally mediated contexts, it does not specify particular digital technologies, which raises questions about its alignment with criterion IC5. Therefore, we have marked this case as an exception in the results section and have revised its treatment to clearly distinguish it from studies that do report specific digital tools. Text added in the article (in RQ2): It is worth noting that the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) constitutes an exception, as it recognizes the benefits of using technologies in intercultural contexts but does not describe specific digital tools implemented in the intervention. This limits its comparability with other studies in the corpus and should be considered a methodological limitation in the interpretation of the results. Comment 3: In RQ3 and RQ4, it is unclear whether the competences and areas were explicit objectives of the interventions or emerged as incidental outcomes. Response: We acknowledge that not all studies in the corpus clearly differentiated between competences explicitly targeted in the pedagogical design and those that emerged during the implementation process. This distinction has been added to the corresponding sections, along with a methodological note in the data extraction section, indicating how both types of findings were recorded. Text added in the article, in the Methods section (end of 2.4): It is important to note that during data extraction, both competences and focus areas explicitly stated in the objectives or methodological designs of the studies, as well as those that emerged as observed outcomes or later reflections, were recorded. This distinction was maintained in the analysis matrices, although not all studies clearly differentiated between these levels. Text added at the end of RQ3: It is important to mention that in several studies, the intercultural competences and areas of digital integration were identified as emerging benefits during the implementation of the interventions rather than as predefined pedagogical goals. This methodological ambiguity may affect the interpretation of the results and highlights the need for future studies with more explicit designs and structured pre-post evaluations. Comment 4: The potential influence of specific digital tools on the development of particular competences is not sufficiently addressed. Response: We highly value this observation, which has allowed us to enrich the analysis. We have incorporated an additional reflection in the discussion section, addressing the need for deeper investigation into the correspondence between types of digital tools and specific intercultural competences—particularly in teaching contexts mediated by emerging technologies such as immersive environments or social networks. Text added in the article, in the Discussion section (after RQ4): Although technological categories and frequently addressed intercultural competences were identified, there remains a gap in the literature regarding the specific correlation between particular digital tools and the competences developed. Except for some cases—such as the use of COIL to promote intercultural communication—studies rarely establish a direct relationship between the tool used and the competence achieved. This methodological limitation suggests the need for future research using experimental designs that can assess the differential impact of specific technologies (such as virtual reality, gamification, or social networks) on the development of competences such as empathy, global collaboration, or intercultural critical thinking. Once again, we sincerely thank you for your suggestions, which have significantly enriched the manuscript and helped us to reinforce its conceptual and methodological soundness. We remain attentive to any further comments you may wish to share. Sincerely, Dr. Andrea Basantes-Andrade On behalf of the author team Universidad Técnica del Norte [email protected] Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 06 Aug 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 3 4 Version 3 (revision) 01 Dec 25 read read Version 2 (revision) 14 Oct 25 read read Version 1 06 Aug 25 read read Eleni Korosidou , University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece Murod Ismailov , University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan Nicia Guillén Yparrea , Engineering and Sciences School, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Monterrey, Mexico Lies Sercu , Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Ismailov M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 02 Jan 2026 | for Version 3 Murod Ismailov , University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan 0 Views copyright © 2026 Ismailov M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Dear authors, thank you for the thoughtful and constructive responses. I appreciate the clear revisions and methodological clarifications provided throughout. I can now see that the justifications are coherent and strengthen your manuscript. The explanations regarding PRISMA adaptation, temporal trends, data consistency, and category overlaps are clear and appropriate. I also value the corrections made to percentages, geographical classification, and technological categories. Overall, the revisions enhance transparency and improve the scientific rigor of your study. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise educational psychology, telecollaboration I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Ismailov M. Peer Review Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.192487.r437728) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3#referee-response-437728 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Sercu L. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 31 Dec 2025 | for Version 3 Lies Sercu , Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium 0 Views copyright © 2026 Sercu L. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thank you for your revisions. My suggestion is to accept the manuscript in its current version. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise acquisition of intercultural competence; technology-supported promotion of intercultural competence I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Sercu L. Peer Review Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.192487.r437727) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3#referee-response-437727 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Sercu L. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 13 Nov 2025 | for Version 2 Lies Sercu , Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium 0 Views copyright © 2025 Sercu L. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions 1. Scope and Objectives : The article presents a systematic literature mapping (SLM) of studies published between 2005 and 2024 on the integration of digital technologies in teaching intercultural competences in higher education. It follows PRISMA 2020 guidelines and includes 23 peer-reviewed, open-access studies in English or Spanish. While the scope is clearly defined, the rationale and research questions show some misalignment. The gaps identified in the introduction (e.g., lack of longitudinal studies, ethical implications of immersive tech) are not fully addressed by the six research questions, which focus more on descriptive mapping than critical analysis. There is a need to reframe the rationale and clarify the connection between gaps and questions. 2. Methodological Rigor The study combines PRISMA with the Petersen model, ensuring transparency in selection and classification. However, several methodological limitations weaken its robustness: Language bias: Only English and Spanish studies were included, excluding potentially rich literature in French, Chinese, Arabic, etc. Open-access restriction: This may have excluded high-quality but paywalled research. Lack of interrater reliability reporting: Although multiple reviewers were involved, no reliability coefficients are provided. Ambiguity in competence definitions: Terms like “intercultural knowledge” are treated as competences, which may require conceptual clarification. 3. Findings and Analysis The article offers a comprehensive overview of: Geographic concentration: 78% of studies from Americas and Europe, with Mexico, US, and Spain leading. Technologies used: LMS platforms (68.18%), COIL/blended learning (45.45%), social networks (27.27%), productivity tools (18.18%). Competence dimensions: Adaptation/management (47.83%), intercultural knowledge, communication skills, attitudes (each ~39%). However, the analysis remains largely descriptive, lacking deeper synthesis or critical engagement with how specific technologies foster particular competences. For example, the article notes the use of social media but does not explore its pedagogical implications in depth. 4. Novelty and Contribution The article’s main novelty lies in: Being the first systematic mapping (not a full SLR) of digital technologies in intercultural competence education. Highlighting underexplored areas such as innovative leadership (4.35%) and personal development (8.70%). Identifying a post-pandemic paradigm shift toward immersive, hybrid, and AI-enhanced learning environments. Emphasizing the coexistence of formal and informal digital strategies, with a call to better integrate social media and mobile apps. These insights are valuable for shaping future research agendas and policy frameworks, especially in terms of digital equity, teacher training, and assessment innovation. 5. Limitations and Areas for Improvement The article acknowledges several limitations in the reviewed studies: Institutional collaboration challenges (34.78%) Methodological weaknesses (30.43%) Sampling bias (26.09%) Technological and communication barriers Yet, the article itself could improve by: Providing examples to clarify abstract claims (e.g., immersive environments, pedagogical technologies). Avoiding overstatements about its impact (e.g., claiming to establish a reference framework without sufficient empirical grounding). Including more critical reflection on the ethical implications of AI and immersive tech. Conclusion This article makes a timely and relevant contribution to the field of digital intercultural education by mapping current practices and identifying critical gaps. Its novelty lies in its methodological approach and its emphasis on emerging technologies and underrepresented competences. However, to fully realize its potential, the study would benefit from greater conceptual clarity, broader linguistic inclusion, and deeper analytical engagement with the pedagogical implications of digital tools. Article that is missing from the review: Jin, Y., & Sercu, L. (2025). Approaches to Researching Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature (2018–2022) as a Platform for Improving the Design of Future Studies on Technology-Supported Interventions. Review of Educational Research , 00346543251353803. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Partly Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Partly References 1. Jin, Y., & Sercu, L. (2025). Approaches to Researching Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature (2018–2022) as a Platform for Improving the Design of Future Studies on Technology-Supported Interventions. Review of Educational Research, 00346543251353803. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise acquisition of intercultural competence; technology-supported promotion of intercultural competence I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 04 Dec 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade, Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador Dear reviewer, We are truly grateful for the dedication and careful attention you invested in evaluating our manuscript. Your thoughtful observations and constructive recommendations have greatly contributed to strengthening the methodological rigor, improving the clarity of the content, and refining the overall structure of the work. Below, we present a comprehensive, point-by-point reply to each of your remarks, detailing the specific modifications that have been made in response. Responses to Reviewer 4 We deeply appreciate your valuable feedback. Kind regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Sercu L. Peer Review Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189102.r424819) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v2#referee-response-424819 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Yparrea N. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 11 Nov 2025 | for Version 2 Nicia Guillén Yparrea , Engineering and Sciences School, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Monterrey, Mexico 0 Views copyright © 2025 Yparrea N. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Dear Authors, I hope you are doing great. It was a pleasure to review your manuscript. I share my recommendations in order to improve its quality. Evaluation: 1. Validity of the Study The study addresses the timely and relevant topic of integrating digital technologies to develop intercultural competencies in higher education. Its theoretical foundation is solid and grounded in contemporary perspectives on interculturality and digital literacy. Using a systematic literature mapping (SLM) approach is appropriate for identifying trends and research gaps. However, the main research question and comparative scope across regions and disciplines should be clearer. This would strengthen the study's external validity and clarify its specific contribution to the broader field of intercultural digital education. 2. Data and Methods: The methodology is appropriate and described in sufficient detail. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are well-defined, and the analysis process follows the PRISMA 2020 recommendations. To enhance transparency, it would be useful to specify the screening procedure and justify the exclusion of studies in other languages. Including a supplementary table listing all analyzed articles would improve replicability and traceability further. Overall, the methods are rigorous and aligned with the open research standards promoted by F1000Research. 3. Interpretation: The results are well-organized and coherently interpreted. The paper effectively identifies patterns, gaps, and thematic clusters, providing valuable insights to the field. However, the discussion could be enriched by delving deeper into the pedagogical implications of digital tools for intercultural learning and by comparing the findings with those from studies in underrepresented regions, such as Latin America and Africa. Finally, a reflection on how the results can inform curriculum design or internationalization policies would enhance the paper’s applied relevance and theoretical impact. 4. Clarity and Presentation: The manuscript is clearly written and well-structured. The figures and tables are relevant and effectively support the narrative. Minor language editing is recommended to ensure consistency in terminology (e.g., intercultural competence versus digital intercultural literacy). Adding a short "Limitations" section before the conclusions, acknowledging temporal, linguistic, and methodological scope, would improve transparency. Please note that I used "DeepL Write" to improve the writing of this review. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Partly Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Intercultural Education, International Education, Educational Technology, Educational Innovation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 04 Dec 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade, Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador Dear reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your insightful comments and constructive suggestions have been instrumental in enhancing the scientific rigor, clarity, and overall coherence of the paper. Below, we provide a detailed, point-by-point response to each of your comments, indicating the specific revisions that have been incorporated into the manuscript accordingly. Reviewer 3's Responses Thank you again for your valuable review. We remain available for any further comments. Best regards, Andrea Basantes-Andrade View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Yparrea NG. Peer Review Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189102.r424817) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v2#referee-response-424817 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Ismailov M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 05 Sep 2025 | for Version 1 Murod Ismailov , University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan 0 Views copyright © 2025 Ismailov M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This is a timely and relevant study that maps research on the integration of digital technologies into intercultural competence teaching in higher education. The topic is important and the dataset is valuable, particularly in highlighting trends since 2019. The use of PRISMA brings transparency to the selection process, and the six research questions are well formulated. However, I see several areas where the paper needs clarification and corrections before it can be indexed. These relate mainly to methodological clarity, numerical consistency, and the alignment between results and conclusions. In its current form, some findings may be misleading to readers because of overlapping categories, unclear data handling, and inconsistent reporting. Major Issues 1 - Methodological concerns The paper calls itself a “systematic literature mapping” (SLM) but applies PRISMA 2020, which is standard for systematic literature reviews (SLRs). These two approaches have different purposes and levels of rigor. If PRISMA is being used for an SLM, please explain how it was adapted and why it was chosen over mapping-specific frameworks. 2 - Confusion with coverage period vs. actual results While the review covers 2005–2024, nearly 87% of the included studies are from 2019 onward. Was this due to a genuine lack of earlier research, or might the search strategy have favored recent publications? A short explanation would help readers interpret the temporal trends. 3 - PRISMA flow diagram promems The numbers don’t quite add up. You report 176 initial records and 5 duplicates removed, which should leave 171, but the screening stage starts with 155. Please check and correct the counts so the selection process is transparent. 4 - Check inclusion criteria consistency Inclusion criterion IC5 requires that studies integrate technology into intercultural competence teaching. At least one included study (Ciftci & Savas, 2018) does not clearly meet this requirement. If exceptions are made, they should be explicitly justified. 5 - Problem with percentage discrepancies For example, RQ3 states that “communication skills” is the focus of 42% of studies, but Table 4 lists 14 out of 23 studies (~61%). Please review all reported percentages to ensure they match the underlying data. 6 - competence dimensions overlap In RQ4, many studies appear in multiple categories (e.g., communication skills and intercultural attitudes). This is fine, but the paper should clarify whether percentages are exclusive or overlapping so readers understand how totals are calculated. 7 - Geographic mis-classification? Scotland is listed separately from the United Kingdom, which inflates diversity counts. Unless a study explicitly treats Scotland as separate from the UK, these should be merged for consistency. 8 - Another overlap - Technology category Some tools (e.g., COIL) are counted in more than one category, which can inflate category frequencies. Please define clear, mutually exclusive categories or explain why overlaps are reported. 9 - Mismatch between your results and conclusions The conclusion states there is a “clear preference for structured teaching tools,” but 27% of studies use social media, which is not negligible. This should be discussed so conclusions reflect the actual distribution. 10 - Peer review compliance issue Some included works (e.g., Munoz-Escalona et al., 2020) may not clearly meet the “peer-reviewed” criterion. Please verify the status of each study and remove any that do not meet IC2. Other technical / presentation issues. Please: Clarify why an SLM is using PRISMA and how it was adapted. Ensure all PRISMA counts match the narrative. Recalculate and correct all percentages. State clearly if competence dimension percentages are overlapping or exclusive. Standardize country/region reporting. Double-check that all included studies meet the stated inclusion criteria. Define mutually exclusive technology categories. Add clearer figure/table legends, especially for calculation bases. Include a breakdown of methodological quality scores for each study. Link each conclusion directly to quantitative evidence from the results. My recommendation - Major Revision – The study has some value, but key methodological and reporting issues must be addressed. I would like the authors to correct the numerical inconsistencies / clarify overlaps, / align conclusions more closely with the data ... these should somewhat strengthen the paper. Good luck. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Partly Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Partly If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise telecollaboration, intercultural communication, digital learning I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 14 Oct 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade, Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to evaluating our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have been extremely valuable in strengthening the scientific quality, clarity, and overall coherence of the work. Below, we provide a detailed response to each of your comments, indicating the revisions incorporated into the manuscript and, where applicable, the justification for maintaining the original wording. https://f1000research-files.f1000.com/linked/754109.Reviewer_2%27s_Responses.docx Sincerely, PhD. Andrea Basantes View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Ismailov M. Peer Review Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184474.r407498) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v1#referee-response-407498 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Korosidou E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 25 Aug 2025 | for Version 1 Eleni Korosidou , University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece 0 Views copyright © 2025 Korosidou E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This is a well-written study that makes a valuable contribution to understanding the integration of digital technologies in intercultural teaching, offering a solid basis for further research in the field. However, the following aspects merit consideration to reinforce the study. The inclusion criterion IC1, “Scientific articles written in English or Spanish,” may have influenced the results for RQ1, as the concentration of research in the Americas and Europe could be partly explained by the acceptance of Spanish-language publications. The finding that Mexico leads scientific production with 15% (n=4), followed by the United States, Spain, and Russia with 11% each (n=3), should therefore be acknowledged as potentially shaped by language-based inclusion. The inclusion of Ciftci and Savas (2018) also appears problematic, since the study emphasizes the benefits of technologies in intercultural teaching but does not specify the use of particular digital tools, raising questions about consistency with the criteria. For RQ3, it remains unclear whether the reported areas of digital technology integration (communication skills, cultural attitudes, and technological adoption) were deliberately targeted in the interventions or whether they emerged as benefits observed during implementation. A similar lack of clarity is noted in RQ4 with respect to intercultural competences: it is not evident whether these were explicitly addressed in the design of interventions or whether they developed incidentally during the research process. Finally, the potential influence of specific digital tools on the development of particular competences is not sufficiently addressed, and further insights in this direction would strengthen the study. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Yes If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Yes Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Intercultural communication skills and strategies, Language Teaching and Learning, ICT integration I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 14 Oct 2025 Andrea Basantes-Andrade, Network Science Research Group (eCIER), Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 100105, Ecuador Dear Reviewer, Warm greetings. We sincerely thank you for the time dedicated to reviewing our manuscript entitled “Integration of digital technologies in the teaching of intercultural competences: systematic literature mapping” , and for your valuable comments, which have allowed us to strengthen the quality and rigor of the study. Below, we provide detailed responses to each of the comments received: Comment 1: The inclusion criterion IC1, “Scientific articles written in English or Spanish,” may have influenced the concentration of research in the Americas and Europe, thus affecting the findings for RQ1. Response: We agree that the adopted language criterion (IC1) may have partially influenced the results of RQ1. We acknowledge that the inclusion of publications in Spanish may have favored the representation of studies from Latin American contexts, especially from Mexico and South America. This limitation has been added as a critical observation in the discussion section, in order to make transparent the possible linguistic-geographical bias in the analyzed sample. Incorporated explanatory text in the discussion section (at the end of RQ1): Additionally, it is important to consider that the inclusion of studies exclusively in English or Spanish may have limited the geographical representativeness of the sample, favoring research originating from Latin America and Spanish-speaking countries. This linguistic bias may have influenced the predominance of Mexico and Spain in the results; therefore, future reviews could expand the language criterion to include other relevant languages, such as French, Chinese, or Arabic, to better reflect geocultural diversity. Comment 2: The inclusion of the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) appears problematic, as it does not specify particular digital tools. Response: After reexamining the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018), we agree that, although it addresses intercultural teaching in digitally mediated contexts, it does not specify particular digital technologies, which raises questions about its alignment with criterion IC5. Therefore, we have marked this case as an exception in the results section and have revised its treatment to clearly distinguish it from studies that do report specific digital tools. Text added in the article (in RQ2): It is worth noting that the study by Ciftci and Savas (2018) constitutes an exception, as it recognizes the benefits of using technologies in intercultural contexts but does not describe specific digital tools implemented in the intervention. This limits its comparability with other studies in the corpus and should be considered a methodological limitation in the interpretation of the results. Comment 3: In RQ3 and RQ4, it is unclear whether the competences and areas were explicit objectives of the interventions or emerged as incidental outcomes. Response: We acknowledge that not all studies in the corpus clearly differentiated between competences explicitly targeted in the pedagogical design and those that emerged during the implementation process. This distinction has been added to the corresponding sections, along with a methodological note in the data extraction section, indicating how both types of findings were recorded. Text added in the article, in the Methods section (end of 2.4): It is important to note that during data extraction, both competences and focus areas explicitly stated in the objectives or methodological designs of the studies, as well as those that emerged as observed outcomes or later reflections, were recorded. This distinction was maintained in the analysis matrices, although not all studies clearly differentiated between these levels. Text added at the end of RQ3: It is important to mention that in several studies, the intercultural competences and areas of digital integration were identified as emerging benefits during the implementation of the interventions rather than as predefined pedagogical goals. This methodological ambiguity may affect the interpretation of the results and highlights the need for future studies with more explicit designs and structured pre-post evaluations. Comment 4: The potential influence of specific digital tools on the development of particular competences is not sufficiently addressed. Response: We highly value this observation, which has allowed us to enrich the analysis. We have incorporated an additional reflection in the discussion section, addressing the need for deeper investigation into the correspondence between types of digital tools and specific intercultural competences—particularly in teaching contexts mediated by emerging technologies such as immersive environments or social networks. Text added in the article, in the Discussion section (after RQ4): Although technological categories and frequently addressed intercultural competences were identified, there remains a gap in the literature regarding the specific correlation between particular digital tools and the competences developed. Except for some cases—such as the use of COIL to promote intercultural communication—studies rarely establish a direct relationship between the tool used and the competence achieved. This methodological limitation suggests the need for future research using experimental designs that can assess the differential impact of specific technologies (such as virtual reality, gamification, or social networks) on the development of competences such as empathy, global collaboration, or intercultural critical thinking. Once again, we sincerely thank you for your suggestions, which have significantly enriched the manuscript and helped us to reinforce its conceptual and methodological soundness. We remain attentive to any further comments you may wish to share. Sincerely, Dr. Andrea Basantes-Andrade On behalf of the author team Universidad Técnica del Norte [email protected] View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Korosidou E. Peer Review Report For: Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural Competences: A Systematic Literature Mapping [version 3; peer review: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :772 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184474.r404966) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v1#referee-response-404966 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Integrating Digital Technologies into the...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Basantes-Andrade A et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772", templates : { twitter : "Integrating Digital Technologies into the Teaching of Intercultural.... Basantes-Andrade A et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/14-772/v3" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/167364/192487") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "192487"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "407494": 0, "407495": 0, "407502": 0, "407503": 0, "407500": 0, "407501": 0, "407498": 27, "407499": 0, "407496": 0, "407497": 0, "437726": 0, "437727": 4, "437725": 0, "404966": 17, "404967": 0, "424036": 0, "424037": 0, "437728": 3, "404974": 0, "424814": 0, "404975": 0, "424815": 0, "404972": 0, "404973": 0, "404970": 0, "404971": 0, "404968": 0, "404969": 0, "424822": 0, "424823": 0, "424820": 0, "424821": 0, "424818": 0, "424819": 14, "424816": 0, "424817": 10, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "cef6e447-b307-414c-b6bf-c6487e88f865"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });