Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research

Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century... | 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/14-1191" }, "headline": "Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis...", "datePublished": "2025-10-31T16:44:15", "dateModified": "2026-01-13T09:00:01", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Ella Izzatin Nada" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Sajidan Sajidan" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Sri Retno Dwi Ariani" } ], "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": "It is established by Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6) that clean water and sanitation are essential for achieving good health and environmental health around the world. This research examines the effects of habits of mind on the development of modern skills and environmental health, especially their part in making progress toward SDG 6 in educational research. By reviewing data on publications from Scopus covering 2010 to 2025, the research finds main research areas, important topic groups and prominent players who focus on including critical thinking, creativity and perseverance in education. The findings indicate that including key mindsets in curriculum can make people more aware of the environment and motivation for caring about clean water management and sanitation. This study uncovers research areas that are understudied in Indonesia and highilights the importance of stronger collaboration and teaching approaches that meet cultural needs. The report makes recommendations for policies and education to show how education, modern skills and sustainability come together to meet the goals of SDG 6." } { "@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/14-1191/v1", "name": "Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental..." } } ] } Home Browse Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Nada EI, Sajidan S and Ariani SRD. Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.170682.1 ) 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 ▬ ✚ Research Article Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] Ella Izzatin Nada https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7085-2450 1,2 , Sajidan Sajidan 3 , Sri Retno Dwi Ariani 4 Ella Izzatin Nada https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7085-2450 1,2 , Sajidan Sajidan 3 , Sri Retno Dwi Ariani 4 PUBLISHED 31 Oct 2025 Author details Author details 1 Department of Natural Science Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 2 Department of Chemistry Education, Faculty of Science and Technology, UIN Walisongo, Semarang, Indonesia 3 Department of Biology Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 4 Department of Chemistry Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia Ella Izzatin Nada Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Sajidan Sajidan Roles: Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Sri Retno Dwi Ariani Roles: Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract It is established by Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6) that clean water and sanitation are essential for achieving good health and environmental health around the world. This research examines the effects of habits of mind on the development of modern skills and environmental health, especially their part in making progress toward SDG 6 in educational research. By reviewing data on publications from Scopus covering 2010 to 2025, the research finds main research areas, important topic groups and prominent players who focus on including critical thinking, creativity and perseverance in education. The findings indicate that including key mindsets in curriculum can make people more aware of the environment and motivation for caring about clean water management and sanitation. This study uncovers research areas that are understudied in Indonesia and highilights the importance of stronger collaboration and teaching approaches that meet cultural needs. The report makes recommendations for policies and education to show how education, modern skills and sustainability come together to meet the goals of SDG 6. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Habits of Mind, 21st Century Skills, Environmental Sustainability, SDG 6, Bibliometric Analysis, Education. Corresponding Author(s) Sajidan Sajidan ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Sajidan Sajidan Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: This research was funded by Beasiswa Indonesia Bangkit Kementerian Agama (BIB) and Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan (LPDP) Number: B-3938.5/Dt.I.III/PP.04/09/2023 for supporting and funding the publication of the article. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Copyright: © 2025 Nada EI 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. The author(s) is/are employees of the US Government and therefore domestic copyright protection in USA does not apply to this work. The work may be protected under the copyright laws of other jurisdictions when used in those jurisdictions. How to cite: Nada EI, Sajidan S and Ariani SRD. Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.170682.1 ) First published: 31 Oct 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.170682.1 ) Latest published: 13 Jan 2026, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.170682.2 )  There is a newer version of this article available. Suppress this message for one day. Introduction A lot of experts recognize that education helps develop human capital ( Erjavec, 2020 ; Olaniyan & Okemakinde, 2008 ). Because the world is changing rapidly, critical thinking, flexibility with ideas and problem solving all of which are habits of mind are becoming more important both at work and in personal matters. That includes staying persistent, using their creativity and thinking carefully, so they can handle changing circumstances in different areas of life. This approach matches the worldwide demand for being able to communicate, work with others, use technology and be innovative. As countries move toward being knowledge-led, adding habits of mind to what is taught in schools becomes crucial. Because of these qualities, a person can handle new challenges, use their imagination and keep themselves in check emotionally. Besides teaching thinking skills, schools should now focus on sustainability matters. Ongoing learning should contain exercises in critical thinking, systems thinking, metacognition and wisdom as a way of guiding sustainable actions ( Lander, 2015 ). The depletion of water resources and sanitation problems are urgent issues facing the world that also depend on better environmental care. Educators and policymakers are now paying close attention to SDG 6, as it covers clean water, sanitation and conservation, following the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals ( Al-Noaimi, 2020 ; Ortigara et al., 2018 ). Rural and remote places in Indonesia, an archipelago country, still experience major difficulties with getting water and using sanitation ( Wulandari et al., 2024 ). That’s why it is important to connect education to the wider movement for sustainability, adding habits that encourage responsible environmental activities and action on global sustainability challenges. Learning to think systematically, reason ethically and adapt to problems helps students interact with environmental topics and assist with SDG 6 ( Gray et al., 2019 ; Karaarslan-Semiz, 2022 ). This way of teaching prepares students to handle critical matters related to water shortages, environmental pollution and green resource use. Even so, there is limited research available on how habits of mind influence students’ mental abilities that benefit the environment. While certain developed countries have adopted habits of mind, Indonesia is special in its problems of education and environment and still must explore these techniques to encourage modern skills and sustainability. Missing from the research is a proper study of this context using bibliometrics which is a major gap. Grasping how habits of mind, 21st-century skills and attention to the environment work together in education is necessary to progress both educational reforms and SDG 6 ( John, 2025 ). Because of the pressing nature of these topics, this study analyzes research all over the world on how habits of mind can support these aspirations and, in particular, looks at Indonesia’s education system. The research will map out the field of habits of mind in education, with a particular interest in their effects on developing 21st-century skills and achieving SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation. Aligned teaching of the SDGs in universities leads to solutions that include the technical, ethical, social and environmental factors important for sustainability ( Qablan et al., 2025 ; Zerai & Ajailia, 2024 ). The study hopes to find out how certain habits of mind help students develop critical thinking, creativity and abilities required for success nowadays. Through analysis of publication records, this study will highlight important works and advancements that have directed the research study in this area. This topic will review how educational research has adapted to include perseverance, adaptability and reflective thinking, needed skills to overcome today’s challenges. Furthermore, research will be studied by theme, especially where habits of mind and sustainability education connect with SDG 6. Introducing environmental education to schools leads to better understanding of how to conserve water and reminds students to use resources sustainably each day ( O’Dwyer, 2024 ). This goal is to look at how thinking habits influence people’s knowledge and practices regarding clean water and sanitation. The study will examine how cognitive inclinations and environmental education affect people’s decisions to use water, sanitation and ensure proper management of environmental resources. It is important for this study to understand where most research on habits of mind and sustainability education is located, so we can find key contributors and notice any differences between regions, focusing mainly on Indonesia. Some studies performed in Pontianak have indicated that prospective teacher education students tend to use self-regulation, critical thinking and creativity ( Ariyati & Fitriyah, 2024 ). This research aims to highlight how educational research in Indonesia and other countries tackles the important problem of water access and sanitation. It will also study the methods used in regional education systems to integrate habits of mind and what adaptations can be made to satisfy the requirements of students in diverse areas. Lastly, this study will reveal gaps in the current literature and suggest what directions researchers could pursue in the future. Specifically, it is necessary to examine the alignment of learned habits of mind with curricula, to establish responsive assessment methods for all students and to regularly assess if sustainability interventions are maintained over the years. The reasons for these gaps are explored to help the study show how interventions in education can improve cognitive skills, environmental understanding and support the achievement of global goals such as SDG 6. Accordingly, universities ought to have the Sustainable Development Goals play a role in how they teach, conduct research and take part in the community, to help students gain the skills they need to manage sustainability issues ( Purcell et al., 2019 ; Sprow, 2025 ). This study is designed to explore main questions related to habits of mind in education, while specifically looking at how they are included in educational schedules and national strategies for sustainable development. At the outset, it will look into the leading areas of research and key studies worldwide and at the national level in Indonesia about habits of mind. To identify the main achievements and scholars who have influenced our understanding of perseverance, creativity and critical thinking, you need to understand how research in this area has changed ( Alper, 2010 ). In addition, this study examines the ideas and practices of habits of mind in Indonesian educational theory, research and policies. As a result, it will explore how these qualities are used to build 21st-century skills and increase education about sustainability. In the end, the study will examine where existing research fails and suggest new ways to effectively introduce these habits of mind into teaching and policies. As a result, we will improve cognitive skills and environmental awareness and with clean water and sanitation, meet the goals of SDG 6 ( Mathews & Lowe, 2011 ). The study seeks to explain how habits of mind can benefit education and be part of solving global sustainability issues. This research aims to clarify the status of the field, specifically how adaptive mindsets can help students succeed in terms of today’s skills and ecological sustainability ( Ariyati & Fitriyah, 2024 ). The study will examine Indonesia to assess if reforms that tie cognitive skills to sustainable development can be applied, with SDG 6 as an example. In addition, it will give suggestions on enhancing education practices so that learners in all places can work towards solving complex issues in the environment. Literature review Concept of habit of mind It refers to ways of thinking and acting that individuals use as they deal with difficult problems ( Ariyati & Fitriyah, 2024 ; Hidayati & Idris, 2020 ; Susilowati, Hartini, Mayasari, et al., 2018 ). They are not only skills you learn but also common ways of thinking that guide us in resolving a variety of problems. If a person is said to have a good habit of mind, they are ready to work on a challenge, use critical thinking and keep going when the task challenges them. Through this approach, people get to think about how they think and use the experience to improve their solutions to problems. The growth of these mindsets greatly benefits learning, most of all when situations are unpredictable and challenging. Cognitive dispositions which contain values, attitudes and behaviors, are important for managing hard learning tasks ( Carroll, 2012 ; Crick, 2009 ). Because today’s challenges change often and can be complex, people need to be able to think critically, be creative and stay motivated and adaptive. Learning these habits allows someone to excel in the short term and also helps them become better at learning as time passes. Currently, habit of mind is identified as important for teaching students to adapt, a trait widely needed in today’s rapidly changing world. It was found through research in Indonesia that students planning to become teachers mostly rely on self-regulation, while critical thinking and creative thinking are the next most important habits ( Ariyati & Fitriyah, 2024 ). With industries and societies growing and changing, individuals have to keep up by adapting, innovating and using the skills needed to read, understand and apply new data from their environment. Being flexible with our thinking is very important now, given the rapid progress of technology. Developing this skill allows students to solve challenges well and become more creative ( Choi, 2024 ). For this reason, habits of mind are vital for everyone and help people handle the changing demands of their lives, jobs and active participation in society. As a result, these habits are essential for shaping people able to keep up and do well in the modern, globalized world. Habit of mind and its role in 21st century skill development In recent years, there has been a growing emphasis within educational frameworks worldwide on developing 21st-century skills, which include critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, and communication. These skills are vital for success in a globalized world where innovation and complex problem-solving are essential for navigating the challenges of the future. Habits of mind are central to these frameworks because they provide the foundational cognitive and affective capacities needed to engage with and solve complex problems ( Ariyati et al., 2020 , 2021 ). These cognitive habits foster the adaptability, resilience, and creative thinking required to innovate and tackle new challenges. Integrating habits of mind into educational curricula has been shown to improve students’ ability to apply knowledge in diverse contexts, as well as their capacity to think critically and creatively. By honing these habits, students are better equipped to approach challenges with perseverance and the ability to continuously adapt, qualities that are crucial for lifelong learning and professional success. Several pedagogical models have been explored to nurture habits of mind in educational settings. Among the most prominent models are inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning (PBL), and experiential learning. Problem-based learning (PBL) engages students with authentic challenges, promoting interdisciplinary teamwork and the practical use of acquired knowledge ( Singha & Singha, 2024 ). These approaches encourage students to engage actively with real-world problems, thereby fostering reflection, critical thinking, and perseverance key components of habits of mind. Inquiry-based learning promotes curiosity and exploration, while PBL emphasizes the application of knowledge to solve practical problems, helping students develop problem-solving abilities and self-regulation skills. Experiential learning, on the other hand, provides students with hands-on, real-world experiences that reinforce cognitive and behavioral habits by encouraging direct interaction with the environment. Habits of mind such as critical thinking, creativity, and self-regulation are fundamental for sustained learning and character formation, supporting adaptive and reflective learners ( Ariyati et al., 2020 ; Susilowati, Hartini, Mayasari, et al., 2018 ). These teaching methods not only develop intellectual capacities but also nurture emotional and social skills, such as collaboration, empathy, and self-awareness, which are equally important for personal and professional success. In particular, PBL has been widely adopted in various educational systems to cultivate habits of mind, as it requires students to work collaboratively, engage in critical thinking, and demonstrate persistence in finding solutions to complex problems. These models reflect a growing recognition that fostering habits of mind is not just about teaching content but also about developing the dispositions that allow students to thrive in a rapidly changing world. Habit of mind in relation to Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 6) Researchers today are recognizing that habits of mind help promote both environmental literacy and education for sustainability, especially since the United Nations created the Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6) to emphasize clean water, sanitation and sustainable water management. Reaching the goals for sustainability such as SDG 6, greatly depends on education. During the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005–2014), the goal was to add sustainability ideas to education across the world ( Boyle et al., 2014 ; Moscardo, 2015 ). As environmental challenges of water scarcity, pollution and climate change increase fast, it is crucial for students to learn critical thinking, how to think ethically and about systems. As a result of these habits, pupils can both comprehend and apply their understanding to problems in environmentally sound ways. If students are taught responsible water and sanitation practices, they can learn to help protect resources and the environment when they are adults. Adding these ways of thinking to school curriculum is necessary in order for students to gain skills needed to face current and future problems in the environment ( Ardoin et al., 2020 ; Vira, 2019 ). This approach supports students to think deep about their actions and choose ways to help the environment. Thanks to systems thinking, students can see the connections among natural resources, communities and ecosystems and take a fuller view of sustainability. Since we are experiencing issues like less water or natural resources, more pollution and greater scarcity, ethical decision-making is now more essential than ever. Any education system that encourages these mindset habits will allow students to help protect the environment which helps reach SDG 6 and leads to long-term sustainability all around the world. Habit of mind in the context of Indonesian education Indonesia’s educational system is currently undergoing reforms aimed at enhancing learning quality and equity across diverse regions. However, research on habits of mind remains limited, with most studies focusing on cognitive skills like critical thinking without explicitly addressing the broader dispositional habits necessary for adaptive learning. Some Research on prospective teacher students in Pontianak, Indonesia, indicates that self-regulation, critical thinking, and creative thinking are well-developed habits of mind, with self-regulation being the most dominant and creative thinking the least ( Ariyati & Fitriyah, 2024 ). The Kampus Merdeka policy strives to reform Indonesia’s education system by fostering flexible, student-centered learning aligned with industry demands and individual growth, despite concerns regarding institutional readiness for implementation ( Saa, 2024 ; Voak et al., 2023 ). The challenge lies in developing culturally responsive models that integrate local wisdom with global cognitive frameworks to foster habits of mind effectively. Research models and approaches for developing habits of mind Many instructional approaches can promote the growth of good habits in students in schools. Applying Inquiry Based Learning (IBL) to students motivates them to be curious, question and think deeply as they research ( Chen, 2021 ). Collaboration between students and critical thinking were greatly improved by the use of the Scaffolding Model in physics classes ( Susilowati et al., 2019 ). These approaches guide students to take charge of their thinking by planning, tracking and reflecting on what they do. Using Edutainment and Game-Based Learning, students interact with the material and grow in creativity, motivation and perseverance. Combining these models with material that reflects Indonesian culture and life habits, supports strong habits of mind. With these methods, students can apply what they learn in class to their real lives and build skills useful in our sustainable world. Methodology Data collection Bibliometric analysis looks at research output based on statistics that count how much is published, raises awareness and involves teamwork ( Marvi & Foroudi, 2023 ; Sillet, 2013 ; Valérie & Pierre, 2010 ). To reach the study’s goals, Scopus databases were used because they have a rich and well-reviewed collection in many disciplines. To gather the data, we combined search terms for “habit of mind” with terms about education and sustainability. The goal was to review as many different books that had been published between 2010 and 2025. For a better overview, we mapped data from journals and citations using VOSviewer to show patterns in co-authorship, co-citation and how keywords are connected, highlighting areas of academic interest and patterns of collaboration among researchers. Thanks to these tools, I was able to look closely at the trends, important factors and connections among the research studies. Search strategy Authors usually find their data through Scopus, Web of Science and Dimensions, studying publication rates, how often articles are cited and the degree of international research cooperation ( Petera, 2017 ; Sundar & Gurupandi, 2025 ). Scopus was chosen as the leading data provider because it covers a broad range of peer-reviewed journals, keeps accurate citations and is famous in academic bibliometrics. The process involved finding studies that mention educational habits of mind through using keywords and Boolean words. We mainly used the terms: • “habit of mind” AND “education” • “environmental sustainability” AND “environmental education” To narrow down the results, filters were applied, including publication dates from 2010 to 2025, with language restricted to English. The dataset includes only journal articles, conference papers and book chapters. This year range was selected to highlight recent advances and ongoing trends, guaranteeing the research would be helpful for present challenges and those about sustainability, as well as development of thinking skills in education. Analysis tools We used several bibliometric tools to study the data. Most of my network mapping work was done with VOSviewer. Building and exploring bibliometric networks is most effective with VOSviewer ( Jayasree & Baby, 2019 ; Lim et al., 2024 ). As a result, it was possible to pinpoint groups of research, notable contributors and new subjects related to habits of mind, education and sustainability. Using VOSviewer, it was possible to see how authors collaborated and how key research topics progressed over the years. Citation analysis was also explored using Publish or Perish, along with VOSviewer. Thanks to this tool, users could see important statistics like the h-index and find influential articles that help show how specific studies impact their field ( Herawan et al., 2024a , 2024b ; Nandiyanto et al., 2023 ; Obuseh & Duffy, 2022 ). Using Microsoft Excel, we were able to organize the bibliometric information and record trends by year, country and journal ( Janzen, 2022 ; Nageye et al., 2024 ). Combining all these tools enabled the study to review the entire research landscape, showing which topics were well-established and which were just developing, mainly in areas where habits of mind meet sustainable development and changes in education. Inclusion and exclusion criteria The study includes specific document types journal articles, conference papers, and reviews to ensure a focus on peer-reviewed, scholarly publications ( Hallinger & Kovačević, 2022 ; Sahni & Kaurav, 2023 ). The study included publications that explicitly addressed the concept of habits of mind within the context of education, learning strategies, and cognitive skill development. Both empirical and theoretical studies were considered to provide a comprehensive view of the research landscape. The aim was to capture a wide range of studies that explore how habits of mind are applied within educational frameworks and how these cognitive dispositions contribute to student learning and development. To ensure the quality and relevance of the analysis, studies focusing exclusively on unrelated cognitive domains or those outside of educational contexts were excluded. Additionally, only peer-reviewed publications that provided sufficient bibliometric data within the Scopus database were included. This approach helped maintain the integrity and reliability of the findings, ensuring that the selected studies met high academic standards and were relevant to the objectives of the research ( Lim et al., 2024 ). Data analysis The bibliometric data was analyzed quantitatively to uncover key trends in the publication of research related to habits of mind, as well as the geographical distribution of these studies. This analysis helped to identify influential authors and institutions that have made significant contributions to the field, along with thematic areas that have been the focus of research. Co-occurrence and network analyses were conducted to identify dominant research clusters and emerging topics ( Cech, 2017 ; Hosseini et al., 2025 ), highlighting the evolution of research in this area and the intersections with other disciplines, such as environmental education and sustainability. A particular focus was placed on the presence and nature of Indonesian studies within the broader research landscape. By examining the volume and quality of publications originating from Indonesia, the study aimed to assess the national research landscape and identify gaps in the current body of knowledge. This approach provided valuable insights into the unique challenges faced by Indonesian education, as well as opportunities for future research to address these gaps, particularly in relation to the integration of habits of mind and sustainability education within the country’s educational system. Results Publication trends (2010-2025) A steady increase in research on habits of mind in education is seen in publications between 2010 and 2025. Since around 2015, studies on cognitive dispositions have increased rapidly, as it became clear to the world that critical thinking, problem-solving and perseverance are vital to learning in the 21st century. The highest level of income growth was seen during 2021–2023 due to how the COVID-19 pandemic affected traditional education. Because learning moved to remote and hybrid models, the significance of adaptive cognitive skills ( Lin & McNab, 2005a , 2005b ) became more noticeable and researchers became more interested in studying habits of mind. They point out that there is increasing scholarly agreement that these attitudes must be part of teaching in order to help learners meet modern challenges. Figure 1. Annual publication counts on habits of mind research from 2010 to 2025. Highly cited papers Using citation numbers, bibliometric analysis found the most influential publications about habits of mind in education. Published in 2015, Martin’s article is the most cited, with 582 mentions in other works, showing the great importance of making in education for encouraging both innovative and perseverant learning from students. In addition, R.W. Roeser’s (2012) research on introducing mindfulness into teacher training, cited 295 times, points out that persistence, self-control and reflection are basic skills needed in difficult learning environments. Works like those from C. Halse (2010) on supervising doctorates, from M. Tedre (2016) concerning computational thinking and from E.R. Hollins (2011) on teacher preparation all demonstrate that cognitive abilities are necessary in different ways for students to succeed in education. They also show that habits of mind are crucial for helping both learners and educators deal with the needs of education in the 21st century. Table 1. Ten most cited articles in habits of mind research. No Authors Title Year Cites 1 L. Martin The promise of the maker movement for education 2015 582 2 R.W. Roeser Mindfulness Training and Teachers' Professional Development: An Emerging Area of Research and Practice 2012 295 3 C. Halse Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work 2010 199 4 M. Tedre The long quest for computational thinking 2016 181 5 E.R. Hollins Teacher preparation for quality teaching 2011 161 6 I. Lee Computational Thinking from a Disciplinary Perspective: Integrating Computational Thinking in K-12 STEM Education 2020 133 7 L.R. Lattuca Supporting the Development of Engineers' Interdisciplinary Competence 2017 123 8 L. Dyche Curiosity and medical education 2011 104 9 A. Venezia Transitions from high school to college 2013 98 10 M. Tekkumru-Kisa A framework for analyzing cognitive demand and content-practices integration: Task analysis guide in science 2015 97 Leading journals and institutions A number of vital academic journals have made research on habits of mind widely accessible by continually sharing both findings and ideas on cognitive skill growth and educational transformation. JPEER, Thinking Skills and Creativity and the Educational Psychology Review are some of the best examples. They give researchers a key opportunity to debate and advance research on how cognitive dispositions help students and adapt education to modern changes. The regular publishing of excellent articles highlights the role of these journals in guiding the field and combining cognitive psychology, education and new innovations. Because these outlets are frequently cited in bibliometric studies of habits of mind literature, it is clear they play an important role in sharing research. Organizations in the United States have the biggest impact around the world ( Merigó & Yang, 2017 ). Figure 2. Visualization of the top ten journals publishing research on habits of mind. Author collaboration networks Key contributors to the collaborative research in habits of mind are displayed clearly in the co-authorship network analysis. Researchers Lammi, M. Stephan, A.T. and Gal, I are important in the network because they help to encourage and promote joint work among peers. These networks demonstrate how institutions from many regions in North America and Europe regularly work together and exchange ideas. Readily available research networks, including those between varying sectors and expertise, often increase the research ability and creativity of educational institutions ( Dooly et al., 2022 ; Ismail, 2024 ; Makhanya, 2020 ). The nature of these collaborations reveals the worldwide characteristics of habits-of-mind initiatives, reflecting how different departments and schools are contributing to knowledge together. Because these networks are strong and detailed, they show there is an active and linked academic community supporting the exchange of new ideas and the growth of unique educational methods. Figure 3. Author collaboration network in habits of mind research. Researchers in sustainability education also form a strongly connected global community, similar to what we find in habits of mind research. Big players in sustainability research are linked in dense relationships, crossing borders and involving specialists from various fields. They show that North American and European universities mainly collaborate, sharing ideas and promoting progress in sustainability education. The strong ways people collaborate demonstrate the academic community’s joint efforts to introduce environmental education. Figure 4. Author collaboration network in sustainability education research. Keyword co-occurrence and thematic emphases In co-occurrence analysis, keywords that appear together in documents allow us to discover relationships and group together topics ( Bhuyan et al., 2021 ; Restrepo-Arango & Urbizagástegui-Alvarado, 2017 ; Sáez et al., 2023 ). It helps us see the main themes and central topics in the habits of mind research field. Some of the key themes in the data are mind, practice, education, critical thinking, science and development which all tend to appear with STEM education, new learning methods and professional development for teachers. The different themes underline the fact that the research covers both mental processes and learning situations. At the same time, research connected to sustainability education shows that sustainability, environmental education and higher education are the top keywords. As a result, it’s clear that connecting thinking skills with a focus on the environment and sustainability is becoming more common. The increasing number of articles on habits of mind encourages us to believe more scholars see a connection between mental habits and solving environmental challenges in education. Figure 5. Keyword co-occurrence map in habits of mind research. Meanwhile, when sustainability education is taken into account, researchers mostly study terms such as sustainability, environmental education and higher education. They demonstrate how we are starting to focus more on using ways of thinking that support the environment and sustainability. This means researchers are increasingly considering how habits of mind can support education aimed at solving global environmental problems. The field highlights that people’s habits make ecological crises worse or better and that using sustainable approaches is key to solving these problems ( Portera, 2022 , 2023 ). This area’s keyword patterns show that education supports sustainable development by combining work on cognitive skills with a sense of responsibility for the environment and society. Figure 6. Keyword co-occurrence map in sustainability education research. Discussion Thematic analysis Bibliometric methods have shown that several important themes guide research in habits of mind. Fostering strong thinking skills, creativity and perseverance in students is given greatest attention, as it reflects what is considered important for learners this century ( Cusanelli & Trevallion, 2020 ; Dwyer et al., 2014 ). Many studies show that teaching STEM topics with a problem-based approach helps develop important habits of mind. Moreover, improving teacher learning and revising the curriculum become essential for engraining habits of mind in schools of all kinds. This combination helps students gather information as well as put their skills into action during instruction ( Dolfing et al., 2021 ; Visser et al., 2010 ). Although progress has been made, the analysis shows that the ideas from theories are still far from being applied effectively in education at scale and in practical ways in Indonesia. Adressing this issue is important to make sure habits of mind help students learn worldwide. Author collaboration networks The networks help identify important researchers and understand the structure of the academic community by showing authors who publish collaboratively and they track intellectual links and thematic clusters from how often authors are cited with each other ( Khasseh et al., 2018 ; Scherbakova & Bredikhin, 2021 ). The network analysis of authors shows that numerous important research clusters exist centered around key people known for their research on cognitive skills and educational psychology. These networks show a lot of collaboration among institutions within Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand and the United States. Both Indonesia and other emerging economies are starting to take part in global academic circles, but their roles remain fairly small. Global teamwork and the growth of inclusive partnerships are needed to overcome existing barriers and bring about successful knowledge sharing. By collaborating more, we could speed up the development and contextual use of habits of mind research in regions often left behind which helps equalize educational innovation everywhere. Institutional and country collaborations Tasks at the institutional and country levels are mainly divided between universities and research centers from North America, Europe and some parts of Asia. In North America, researchers are connected in networks that publish more, while in Europe, researchers collaborate more closely, though with less publication impact ( Danús et al., 2023 ). We have seen an increase in Indonesian institutions partnering with major global excellence centers in recent days. They greatly help encourage research methods that are sensitive to different cultures and that relate ideas from around the world to local schooling. These efforts are necessary to fit the habits of mind ideas to the particular problems affecting Indonesian education. When international and local expertise are combined, these cooperative actions improve educational practices and support educational development in areas that are underrepresented. Adding habits of mind to what is taught at school encourages development in the mind, emotions and physical abilities ( Ariyati et al., 2020 ; Dwirahayu et al., 2017 ). Educational strategies Typical educational strategies used for promoting habits of mind are inquiry based learning, PBL and experiential learning. In using these approaches, students are prompted to reflect, reason and stay motivated since these are important to growing habits of mind ( Akçay, 2009 ; Lower-Hoppe et al., 2020 ). Promoting active roles and asking for ongoing answers to problems helps learners gain the skills they need to face difficult everyday challenges. A growing number of studies encourage embed, these instructional models in the national curricula internationally. The purpose of such integration is to boost learners’ ability to be flexible, strong and well-suited to today’s demands. As a result, many view including inquiry, problem-solving and hands-on activities within school systems as essential for growing the habits needed for continued academic success ( Narayanan, 2010 ; Thomas et al., 2025 ). Assessment and evaluation To assess habits of mind, educators use tools such as self report questions, tasks that require performance and teacher reviews. To assess habits of mind, these tools look at feedback, peer assessment and self-assessment and it is peer and self-assessment that seems to connect most strongly, representing 57.1% of habit formation ( Gloria et al., 2018 ). These methods are used to understand both mental and emotional habits that influence each habit of mind. While progress has been made, there are many tools required that address the unique differences found in schools of developing countries. Introduced in chemistry education to look at how students think, this approach has shown important progress in self-regulation, critical thinking and creativity ( Nahadi & Windani, 2017 ). It is crucial to assess existing gaps so that we can correctly measure how effective these interventions are at forming habits. As a result, more research is needed to develop, validate and adapt reliable tools for assessment, so educators and researchers have the right resources to support learning and teach evidence-based practices that are suitable for all cultures. Influential authors and institutions Costa and Kallick are leading experts whose ideas have shaped most studies in the field of habits of mind. Their studies showed that cognitive dispositions are vital for good learning and problem solving. Thanks to Costa and Kallick, Habits of Mind have made a big impact on educational models meant to boost students’ abilities to think critically and solve problems. According to them, forming practices specific to learning helps children learn and grow their brains better ( Kareem et al., 2019 ). Authorities in this way of thinking come from brilliant universities across the globe such as Harvard University and the University of Toronto. Universitas Sebelas Maret in Indonesia is proving to be a leading regional center which points to the increasing interest of developing nations in promoting habits of mind study. Every year, at least 10% of the revenue that is not raised by taxation is put into research and community projects by UNS and is supervised by LPPM to ensure top quality ( Kusumawardani et al., 2017 ). Understanding who these actors are allows us to see existing research trends and provide new opportunities for collaborations internationally. Emerging trends Our study finds that there has been a major rise in research on habits of mind since 2015, with most studies focusing on critical thinking, creativity and integrating problem-based learning. Even though major countries continue to dominate publishing and citations in science, nations such as Indonesia are adding to the field each year. Indonesia is publishing many more scientific papers than Singapore and Thailand ( Fry et al., 2023 ; Sukoco et al., 2023 ). Often, these contributions stress teaching that is fit for each culture and how effective learners are linked to helping the environment. With the rise of these trends, there are many chances for research to use systems thinking, ethical reasoning and critical thinking to further achieve Sustainable Development Goal 6. Thinking about systems is key to resolving the closely linked problems of sustainability, especially those related to clean water and sanitation. Learning how different system components relate helps strengthen water management and sanitation ( Levy et al., 2018 ; Sanneh, 2018 ; Weaver et al., 2025 ). Extending research on this can result in strategies that connect mental development with saving the environment worldwide. Gaps in literature While there is more interest in including habits of mind in education, there is still a big gap in research, primarily in places like Indonesia. Examination of physics students in Banjarmasin found that they had a stable level of self-regulation, critical thinking and creativity ( Susilowati et al., 2018 ). Most research presently focuses on little or medium-scale projects without fully documenting how cognitive dispositions continue to influence education and environment, especially the areas covered by Sustainable Development Goal 6 (clean water and sanitation). It is also important to recognize that very little research discusses the special problems faced in marginalized and rural regions where the gaps in education, resources and environmental concerns are the highest. Economic difficulties, inadequate infrastructure and insufficient numbers of suitable teachers are some of the main issues these regions experience in their education ( Firdaussy et al., 2024 ; Zreik, 2023 ). Habits of mind are not fully explored when they are added to specific curriculum models developed for marginalized groups. Dealing with these gaps is important to guarantee that education improves sustainable development, increases equal access to learning and protects the environment in areas where it is needed most. Policy implications for Indonesia Indonesian policymakers should introduce to national curriculum and teachers’ training programs habits of mind that help students develop critical and creative thinking skills and place special focus on improving education in regions where there is the greatest inequality. There are substantial obstacles for remote and underdeveloped areas that make it difficult to achieve progress in Sustainable Development Goal 6. Hence, it is important for policies to emphasize the development of basic mental abilities such as systems thinking, reasoning ethically and solving environmental problems, so that educators can manage these complex matters ( Ariyati & Fitriyah, 2024 ; Nadiroh et al., 2021 ). If SDG 6 issues are introduced in science lessons, students can discover ways to ensure water is not wasted, save natural resources and improve their hygiene, all activities that support responsible citizenship. Cooperation with foreign institutions in research can speed up the growth of local skills and the adjustment of educational policies to fit the local context. Working together is crucial to match improvement in cognitive skills with Indonesia’s economic and sustainability goals, so that education methods reflect the culture and needs of the country’s various regions. Cognitive skills, apart from formal schooling, greatly influence how the economy grows. Researchers have found that these abilities greatly affect people’s income, the difference in income levels and the health of the economy ( Allen et al., 2018 ; Hanushek, 2013 ). Recommendations for future research Future work should create assessment tools that are sensitive to student culture to better study the effects of habits of mind on student learning in environmental education that supports SDG 6. Based on research into sustainability awareness among students in Taiwan and Sweden, strong cultural differences in sustainability-related thoughts and actions were obvious, suggesting the need for assessment tools suitable for diverse cultures ( Berglund et al., 2020 ). Special attention should also be given to studying whether habits of mind interventions are still effective in promoting sustainable changes over the long term in outlying areas of Indonesia. A further study of the link between how people think and sustainability education is critical. Linking how we learn new things with being aware of our surroundings can help us realize how education supports efforts to protect the planet. Sustainable Development Education (ESD) encourages students to understand other’s feelings and preserves the environment by supporting sustainable behavior ( Ampuero et al., 2015 ; Sood et al., 2022 ). Besides, cooperating more with foreign countries will improve how Indonesia can adapt and extend successful educational frameworks that fit its society and culture. These steps are essential for making reforms address challenges faced by the world as well as persistent issues of educational fairness throughout Indonesia. Conclusion Summary of findings This study of research papers reveals that habits of mind are increasingly important to 21st-century skill development. Habits of mind refer to mental, emotional and physical features that help someone become reflective, creative, self-controlled and able to solve problems well ( Ariyati et al., 2020 ; Oehlman, 2023 ; Susilowati et al., 2018 ). It is clear from the analysis that much of the research comes from developed countries, more is being done in Indonesia and both STEM and problem-based learning frameworks use habits of mind widely. Although there has been important progress, not enough research has been done to understand habits of mind in different cultural and economic settings, especially in Indonesia. The overlap of habits of mind and sustainability education creates an interesting direction for further study. Implications for education policy Systematic inclusion of certain habits of mind in both the curriculum and teachers’ professional development is necessary to strengthen and increase the level of innovation among Indonesian workers. Looking at these mental skills early will make it simpler for students to face knowledge challenges and support the achievement of global development goals, including SDG 6. When learners are taught to think critically, they are able to find sustainable answers for water and sanitation, needed to reach Sustainable Development Goal 6 ( Al-Noaimi, 2020 ; Ortigara et al., 2018 ). Future research directions Further studies are needed to create culturally appropriate tools for assessment, to study habits of mind methods over time and to review how they influence various groups of learners. Also, more research on linkages between ways of thinking and sustainability education, related to SDG 6, is necessary to drive changes in education theory and practice. Ethical approval and consent Ethical approval and consent were not required. Data availability statement All data underlying the results of this study are available in Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17176051 ( Nada et al., 2025 ). Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0). The repository includes the values used to construct all figures and tables, bibliometric indicator values, extracted records, and accompanying documentation for replication. Extended data Supplementary materials, including search strategies, raw bibliometric datasets, and VOSviewer mapping files, are available in Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17149790 ( Nada et al., 2025 ). Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0). Acknowledgement The author acknowledges Beasiswa Indonesia Bangkit Kementerian Agama (BIB) and Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan (LPDP) for supporting and funding the publication of the article. References Akçay B: Problem-based learning in science education. J. Turk. Sci. Educ. 2009; 6 (1): 26–36. Reference Source Allen W, Hyde M, Whannel R, et al. : Teacher reform in Indonesia: can offshore programs create lasting pedagogical shift? Asia Pac. J. Teach. Educ. 2018; 46 (1): 22–37. Publisher Full Text Al-Noaimi MA: Sdg goal 6 monitoring in the Kingdom of Bahrain. Desalin. Water Treat. 2020; 176 : 406–427. Publisher Full Text Alper A: Critical thinking disposition of pre-service teachers. Egitim ve Bilim. 2010; 35 (158): 14–27. Reference Source Ampuero DA, Miranda C, Goyen S: Positive psychology in education for sustainable development at a primary-education institution. Local Environ. 2015; 20 (7): 745–763. Publisher Full Text Ardoin NM, Bowers AW, Gaillard E: Environmental education outcomes for conservation: A systematic review. Biol. Conserv. 2020; 241 : 108224. Publisher Full Text Ariyati E, Fitriyah FK: AN INVESTIGATION INTO HABITS OF MIND PROSPECTIVE TEACHER: DO THEY HAVE IT?; [UMA INVESTIGAÇÃO SOBRE OS HÁBITOS DA MENTE PROFESSOR EM PROSPECTIVA: ELES TÊM ISSO?]; [UNA INVESTIGACIÓN SOBRE HÁBITOS DEL PROFESOR MENTE PROSPECTIVO: ¿LO TIENEN?]. Revista de Gestao Social e Ambiental. 2024; 18 (5). Publisher Full Text Ariyati E, Susilo H, Suwono H, et al. : Habits of mind potency of students of prospective biology teacher. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020; 1567 (2): 022048. Publisher Full Text Ariyati E, Susilo H, Suwono H, et al. : Building students’ habits of mind through process oriented guided inquiry learning. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021; 1918 (5): 052077. Publisher Full Text Berglund T, Gericke N, Boeve-de Pauw J, et al. : A cross-cultural comparative study of sustainability consciousness between students in Taiwan and Sweden. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2020; 22 (7): 6287–6313. Publisher Full Text Bhuyan A, Sanguri K, Sharma H: Improving the Keyword Co-occurrence Analysis: An Integrated Semantic Similarity Approach. 2021 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, IEEM 2021. 2021; 482–487. Publisher Full Text Boyle A, Wilson E, Dimmock K: Space for sustainability?: Sustainable education in the tourism curriculum space. The Routledge Handbook of Tourism and Hospitality Education. 2014; pp. 519–531. Publisher Full Text Carroll D: Examining the Development of Dispositions for Ambitious Teaching: One Teacher Candidate’s Journey. New Educ. 2012; 8 (1): 38–64. Publisher Full Text Cech F: Exploring emerging topics in social informatics: An online real-time tool for keyword co-occurrence analysis. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 10540 LNCS. 2017; pp. 527–536. Publisher Full Text Chen RH: Fostering students’ workplace communicative competence and collaborative mindset through an inquiry-based learning design. Educ. Sci. 2021; 11 (1): 1–13. Publisher Full Text Choi S-Y: Industry Insights on Future Convergence Education: A Survey of Key Competencies and Educational Directions. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON. 2024. Publisher Full Text Crick RD: Assessment in Schools – Dispositions. International Encyclopedia of Education. Third Edition. 2009. Publisher Full Text Cusanelli LN, Trevallion D: Using technology for productive, creative purpose. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. 2020; 13 (1): 1–12. Reference Source Danús L, Muntaner C, Krauss A, et al. : Differences in collaboration structures and impact among prominent researchers in Europe and North America. EPJ Data Sci. 2023; 12 (1). Publisher Full Text Dolfing R, Prins GT, Bulte AMW, et al. : Strategies to support teachers’ professional development regarding sense-making in context-based science curricula. Sci. Educ. 2021; 105 (1): 127–165. Publisher Full Text Dooly Z, Duane A, O’Driscoll A: Creating and Managing EU Funded Research Networks: An Exploratory Case. Electron. J. Bus. Res. Methods. 2022; 20 (1): pp1–p20. Publisher Full Text Dwirahayu G, Kustiawati D, Bidari I: Corresponding Habits of Mind and Mathematical Ability. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2017; 895 (1): 012013. Publisher Full Text Dwyer CP, Hogan MJ, Stewart I: An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Think. Skills Creat. 2014; 12 : 43–52. Publisher Full Text Erjavec E: Reinforcement of Social Sustainability through Education and Public Intangible Capital. Challenges on the Path Towards Sustainability in Europe: Social Responsibility and Circular Economy Perspectives. 2020; pp. 253–270. Publisher Full Text Firdaussy UF, Ningsih S, Asrawijaya E: Basic education for indigenous peoples in Indonesia: Limiting children’s cultural alienation and loss of identity. Issues Educ. Res. 2024; 34 (3): 995–1015. Reference Source Fry CV, Lynham J, Tran S: Ranking researchers: Evidence from Indonesia. Res. Policy. 2023; 52 (5): 104753. Publisher Full Text Gloria RY, Sudarmin S, Indriyanti DR: The effectiveness of formative assessment with understanding by design (UbD) stages in forming habits of mind in prospective teachers. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2018; 983 (1): 012158. Publisher Full Text Gray S, Sterling EJ, Aminpour P, et al. : Assessing (social-ecological) systems thinking by evaluating cognitive maps. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2019; 11 (20). Publisher Full Text Hallinger P, Kovačević J: Applying bibliometric review methods in education: rationale, definitions, analytical techniques, and illustrations. International Encyclopedia of Education. Fourth Edition. 2022. Publisher Full Text Hanushek EA: Economic growth in developing countries: The role of human capital. Econ. Educ. Rev. 2013; 37 : 204–212. Publisher Full Text Herawan T, Anggraini FD, Ihalauw JJOI, et al. : Visualizing Trends in Tourism Entertainment Researches: Bibliometric Analysis Using the Scopus Database. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 837 LNNS. 2024a; pp. 498–504. Publisher Full Text Herawan T, Ermawati KC, Ihalauw JJOI, et al. : Information Visualization of Research Evolution on Innovation in Local Wisdom: A Decade Bibliometric Analysis Using the Scopus Database. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 837 LNNS. 2024b; pp. 485–491. Publisher Full Text Hidayati N, Idris T: Students’ habits of mind profiles of biology education department at public and private universities in Pekanbaru, Indonesia. Int. J. Instr. 2020; 13 (2): 407–418. Publisher Full Text Hosseini E, Alipour-Tehrani M, Salemi N: Evolution, Growth, and Maturity of the Thematic Network in the field of Citation Bias. Scientometrics Research Journal. 2025; 11 (1): 75–108. Publisher Full Text Ismail LS: Innovative synergies collaborating with industry, research organizations, and global institutions in higher education. Artificial Intelligence, Digital Learning, and Leadership: Redefining Higher Education. 2024; 203–217. Publisher Full Text Janzen S: Advancing the Advanced Search: Improving the Web of Science User Experience with a Spreadsheet Search Query Tool. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 1580 CCIS. 2022; pp. 292–299. Publisher Full Text Jayasree V, Baby MD: Scientometrics: Tools, Techniques and Software for Analysis. Indian Journal of Information Sources and Services. 2019; 9 (2): 116–121. Publisher Full Text John M: The Routledge handbook of global sustainability education and thinking for the 21st century. The Routledge Handbook of Global Sustainability Education and Thinking for the 21st Century. 2025. Publisher Full Text Karaarslan-Semiz G: Outdoor Education for Sustainability with Systems Thinking Perspective. Sustainable Development Goals Series , Part F2743. 2022; pp. 39–53. Publisher Full Text Kareem HH, Dehham SH, Al-Wahid MA: The impact of teaching the creative writing by FOCUS strategy to develop. Indian J. Public Health Res. Dev. 2019; 10 (6): 876–880. Publisher Full Text Khasseh AA, Soheili F, Mousavi Chelak A: An author co-citation analysis of 37 years of iMetrics. Electron. Libr. 2018; 36 (2): 319–337. Publisher Full Text Kusumawardani CA, Rosyidi CN, Jauhari WA: The evaluation of criteria and subcriteria of research project selection using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process method. 2016 2nd International Conference of Industrial, Mechanical, Electrical, and Chemical Engineering, ICIMECE 2016. 2017; pp. 112–117. Publisher Full Text Lander L: Sustainability education: Is thinking the key? Sustainability (United States). 2015; 8 (1): 27–31. Publisher Full Text Levy MA, Lubell MN, McRoberts N: The structure of mental models of sustainable agriculture. Nat. Sustain. 2018; 1 (8): 413–420. Publisher Full Text Lim WM, Kumar S, Donthu N: How to combine and clean bibliometric data and use bibliometric tools synergistically: Guidelines using metaverse research. J. Bus. Res. 2024; 182 : 114760. Publisher Full Text Lin T, McNab P: Adaptive support for inductive reasoning ability. Web-Based Intelligent E-Learning Systems: Technologies and Applications. 2005a; pp. 1–23. Publisher Full Text Lin T, McNab P: Supporting inductive reasoning in adaptive virtual learning environment. Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Web-Based Education, WBE 2005. 2005b; pp. 562–566. Reference Source Lower-Hoppe LM, Brgoch S, Chen Y-J, et al. : Inquiry-based learning in action: Theory and practice in higher education. Handbook of Research on Innovations in Non-Traditional Educational Practices. 2020; pp. 34–59. Publisher Full Text Makhanya MS: Research in transforming contexts: Ensuring relevance and impact. International Perspectives on Undergraduate Research: Policy and Practice. 2020; pp. 177–203. Publisher Full Text Marvi R, Foroudi MM: Bibliometric analysis: Main procedure and guidelines. Researching and Analysing Business: Research Methods in Practice. 2023; pp. 43–54. Publisher Full Text Mathews SR, Lowe K: Classroom environments that foster a disposition for critical thinking. Learn. Environ. Res. 2011; 14 (1): 59–73. Publisher Full Text Merigó JM, Yang J-B: Accounting Research: A Bibliometric Analysis. Aust. Account. Rev. 2017; 27 (1): 71–100. Publisher Full Text Moscardo G: The Importance of Education for Sustainability in Tourism. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics and Governance. 2015; pp. 1–21. Publisher Full Text Nada EI, Sajidan S, Ariani SRD: Bibliometric Dataset for Habits of Mind and SDG 6 in Educational Research. Zenodo. 2025. Publisher Full Text Nadiroh N, Zulfa V, Yuliani S: Learning transformation of the 21stcentury curriculum for prospective teacher in term of eco-literacy. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 2021; 802 (1): 012009. Publisher Full Text Nageye AY, Jimale AD, Abdullahi MO, et al. : Emerging Trends in Data Science and Big Data Analytics: A Bibliometric Analysis. SSRG Int. J. Electron. Commun. Eng. 2024; 11 (5): 84–98. Publisher Full Text Nahadi SA, Windani DK: Investigating formative assessment strategy to chemistry habits of mind (CHOM) of buffer solution concept in learning chemistry. Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol. 2017; 2017 (November Special Issue INTE): 276–285. Reference Source Nandiyanto ABD, Ragadhita R, Al Husaeni DN, et al. : Research trend on the use of mercury in gold mining: Literature review and bibliometric analysis. Moroc. J. Chem. 2023; 11 (1): 1–19. Publisher Full Text Narayanan M: Assessment of problem-based learning. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. 2010. Reference Source Obuseh M, Duffy VG: Surgical Human-Robot Interaction: A Bibliometric Review. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) , 13519 LNCS. 2022; pp. 293–312. Publisher Full Text O’Dwyer A: Blue gold: Clean water and sanitation (SDG 6). Teaching the Sustainable Development Goals to Young Citizens (10-16 Years): A Focus on Teaching Hope, Respect, Empathy and Advocacy in Schools. 2024; pp. 194–214. Publisher Full Text Oehlman N: Using the Habits of Mind as a Reflective Tool. Fostering Habits of Mind in Today’s Students: A New Approach to Developmental Education. 2023; pp. 213–220. Publisher Full Text Olaniyan DA, Okemakinde T: Human capital theory: Implications for educational development. Eur. J. Sci. Res. 2008; 24 (2): 157–162. Reference Source Ortigara ARC, Kay M, Uhlenbrook S: A review of the SDG 6 synthesis report 2018 from an education, training, and research perspective. Water (Switzerland). 2018; 10 (10). Publisher Full Text Petera P: Strategic management accounting: Bibliometric analysis and ideas for future research. Proceedings of the 30th International Business Information Management Association Conference, IBIMA 2017 - Vision 2020: Sustainable Economic Development, Innovation Management, and Global Growth, 2017-January. 2017; pp. 4229–4240. Reference Source Portera M: Awareness as a challenge: Learning through our bodies on a planet in crisis. The Palgrave Handbook of Embodiment and Learning. 2022; pp. 61–73. Publisher Full Text Portera M: Habits. Handbook of the Anthropocene: Humans between Heritage and Future. 2023; pp. 1127–1130. Publisher Full Text Purcell WM, Henriksen H, Spengler JD: Universities as the engine of transformational sustainability toward delivering the sustainable development goals: “Living labs” for sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2019; 20 (8): 1343–1357. Publisher Full Text Qablan A, Nowfal N, Al-Faiadh T, et al. : Mapping the representation of four SDGs in international elementary science curriculum and textbooks. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2025; 21 (3): em2596. Publisher Full Text Restrepo-Arango C, Urbizagástegui-Alvarado R: Co-words network in Mexican bibliometrics; [Red de co-palabras en la bibliometría Mexicana]. Investigacion Bibliotecologica. 2017; 31 (73): 17–45. Publisher Full Text Saa S: MERDEKA CURRICULUM: ADAPTATION OF INDONESIAN EDUCATION POLICY IN THE DIGITAL ERA AND GLOBAL CHALLENGES; [CURRÍCULO MERDEKA: ADAPTANDO A POLÍTICA EDUCACIONAL DA INDONÉSIA À ERA DIGITAL E AOS DESAFIOS GLOBAIS]; [CURRÍCULO MERDEKA: ADAPTANDO A POLÍTICA EDUCACIONAL DE INDONESIA A LA ERA DIGITAL Y A LOS DESAFÍOS GLOBALES]. Revista de Gestao Social e Ambiental. 2024; 18 (3). Publisher Full Text Sáez VM, Salomón YP, Domínguez Díaz JM, et al. : Bibliometric analysis of Spanish research on Communication for Development and Social Change (2014-2020): emerging thematics or field in implosion?; [Análisis bibliométrico de la investigación española sobre Comunicación para el Desarrollo y el Cambio Social (2014-2020): ¿temáticas emergentes o campo en implosión?]. Transinformacao. 2023; 35 . Publisher Full Text Sahni S, Kaurav RPS: WHAT? WHY? WHEN? HOW? WHERE? OF TECHNOLOGY-BASED BIBLIOMETRIC REVIEW. Review of Management Literature. 2023; 2 : 79–101. Publisher Full Text Sanneh ES: Systems thinking for sustainable development: Climate change and the environment. Systems Thinking for Sustainable Development: Climate Change and the Environment. 2018. Publisher Full Text Scherbakova NG, Bredikhin SV: Co-authorship network structure analysis. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021; 2099 (1): 012055. Publisher Full Text Sillet A: Defi nition and use of bibliometrics in research. Soins. 2013; 58 (781): 29–30. Publisher Full Text Singha R, Singha S: Application of experiential, inquiry-based, problem-based, and project-based learning in sustainable education. Teaching and Learning for a Sustainable Future: Innovative Strategies and Best Practices. 2024; pp. 109–128. Publisher Full Text Sood A, Reed H, Stanton A: Playponics in India—Local Hydroponics Playground Gardens Utilising Kinaesthetic Learning to Promote Global Sustainable Practices. Springer Series in Design and Innovation. 2022; 17 : 435–443. Publisher Full Text Sprow AH: Higher Education Institutions’ Role in Developing Future Leaders for Sustainability: Incorporating the Inner Development Goals. Int. J. Soc. Sustain. Econ. Soc. Cult. Context. 2025; 20 (1): 117–132. Publisher Full Text Sukoco BM, Putra RA, Muqaffi HN, et al. : Comparative Study of ASEAN Research Productivity. SAGE Open. 2023; 13 (1). Publisher Full Text Sundar S, Gurupandi M: Exploring Strategic Entrepreneurship Research: A Comprehensive Decadal Bibliometric Analysis. Int. Rev. Manag. Mark. 2025; 15 (1): 179–192. Publisher Full Text Susilowati E, Hartini S, Mayasari T, et al. : Profile Habits of Mind Students in Physics Learning. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2018; 1120 (1): 012055. Publisher Full Text Susilowati E, Mayasari T, Winarno N, et al. : Scaffolding learning model to improve habits of mind students. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019; 1280 (5): 052064. Publisher Full Text Thomas MB, Muscat A, Zuccolo A, et al. : Navigating Pedagogical Innovation in Higher Education: Education Academics’Experiences with Active and Inquiry-Based Learning in Intensive Teaching. Innov. High. Educ. 2025. Publisher Full Text Valérie D, Pierre AG: Bibliometric idicators: Quality masurements of sientific publication. Radiology. 2010; 255 (2): 342–351. Publisher Full Text Vira R: Environmental education of young managers. International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM. 2019; 19 (5.4): 139–146. Publisher Full Text Visser TC, Coenders FGM, Terlouw C, et al. : Essential Characteristics for a Professional Development Program for Promoting the Implementation of a Multidisciplinary Science Module. J. Sci. Teach. Educ. 2010; 21 (6): 623–642. Publisher Full Text Voak A, Fairman B, Helmy A, et al. : Kampus Merdeka: Providing Meaningful Engagement in a Disruptive World. J. High. Educ. Theory Pract. 2023; 23 (8): 223–234. Publisher Full Text Weaver M, Fonseca AP, Tan H, et al. : Systems thinking for sustainability: shifting to a higher level of systems consciousness. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 2025; 1–14. Publisher Full Text Wulandari R, Iswara AP, Qadafi M, et al. : Water pollution and sanitation in Indonesia: a review on water quality, health and environmental impacts, management, and future challenges. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2024; 31 (58): 65967–65992. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Zerai M, Ajailia N: ENGINEERING EDUCATION IN THE ERA OF GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY. Proc. Int. CDIO Conf. 2024; 495–505. Reference Source Zreik M: The paradox of educational inequality in Indonesia: Socioeconomic implications and paths towards inclusion. Socio-Economic Implications of Global Educational Inequalities. 2023; pp. 69–85. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 31 Oct 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Department of Natural Science Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 2 Department of Chemistry Education, Faculty of Science and Technology, UIN Walisongo, Semarang, Indonesia 3 Department of Biology Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 4 Department of Chemistry Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia Ella Izzatin Nada Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Sajidan Sajidan Roles: Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Sri Retno Dwi Ariani Roles: Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information This research was funded by Beasiswa Indonesia Bangkit Kementerian Agama (BIB) and Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan (LPDP) Number: B-3938.5/Dt.I.III/PP.04/09/2023 for supporting and funding the publication of the article. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Article Versions (2) version 2 Revised Published: 13 Jan 2026, 14:1191 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.170682.2 version 1 Published: 31 Oct 2025, 14:1191 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.170682.1 Copyright © 2025 Nada EI 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. The author(s) is/are employees of the US Government and therefore domestic copyright protection in USA does not apply to this work. The work may be protected under the copyright laws of other jurisdictions when used in those jurisdictions. 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 Nada EI, Sajidan S and Ariani SRD. Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.170682.1 ) 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 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 31 Oct 2025 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Coronel Zubiate FT. Reviewer Report For: Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188172.r431413 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1191/v1#referee-response-431413 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 Dec 2025 Franz Tito Coronel Zubiate , Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza de Amazonas, Chachapoyas, Peru Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188172.r431413 -This manuscript presents a bibliometric analysis of research on habits of mind in education, with the stated aim of linking habits of mind to 21st-century skills, environmental sustainability, and particularly SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), with special attention ... Continue reading READ ALL -This manuscript presents a bibliometric analysis of research on habits of mind in education, with the stated aim of linking habits of mind to 21st-century skills, environmental sustainability, and particularly SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), with special attention to the Indonesian context. My comments are as follows. I consider points 1–6 necessary to ensure that the article is scientifically sound, while points 7–10 are recommended to improve clarity and impact. 1. Alignment between objectives, SDG 6 focus, and the search strategy. The title, abstract and introduction emphasize a specific focus on SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation), but the reported search strategy only mentions the combinations “habit of mind” AND “education” and “environmental sustainability” AND “environmental education”. No explicit SDG-related terms (e.g. “SDG 6”, “clean water”, “sanitation”, “water management”) are described, and it is not clear how publications related to SDG 6 were identified within the corpus. To avoid a mismatch between aims and methods, the authors should either: (a) explicitly report how SDG 6 was operationalized in the search (including the precise SDG- and water-related keywords or filters used, and how SDG-6-relevant documents were selected and analyzed); or (b) if such a specific SDG 6 search was not in fact implemented, adjust the title, abstract and objectives to present the work as a broader bibliometric analysis on habits of mind, 21st-century skills and sustainability, with SDG 6 discussed more conceptually rather than as the central empirical focus. 2. Insufficient methodological detail for replication. For a bibliometric analysis, reproducibility is crucial. At present, key details are missing. The authors should state: (i) the exact date on which the Scopus search was run; (ii) the full search strings as implemented in Scopus, including fields (e.g. TITLE-ABS-KEY), Boolean operators, truncation, and any subject-area or document-type filters; (iii) the initial number of records retrieved, the number removed as duplicates or irrelevant, and the final number of records included in the analysis; and (iv) whether a manual screening of titles/abstracts was conducted and according to which criteria. In addition, the parameters used in VOSviewer and other tools (e.g. minimum number of occurrences for keywords and authors, counting method, clustering options) should be described clearly. It should also be clarified whether there was a single integrated corpus or whether separate corpora were constructed for habits of mind and sustainability education. Without this information, other researchers cannot replicate or critically appreciate the analysis. 3. Limited quantitative detail in the results. The results section is predominantly narrative and does not provide enough quantitative information for readers to fully understand the patterns described. For example, the “Publication trends” subsection does not report the total number of documents, annual counts, or growth rates, and includes an unclear phrase about “income growth” which seems to refer instead to publication output. The subsection on highly cited papers mentions top articles, but Table 1 is incomplete/truncated and does not list full bibliographic information or citation counts for the top 10 documents. Similarly, the discussion of leading journals, institutions and countries is not supported by tables or explicit numbers. I strongly recommend adding tables summarizing at least: (i) the top journals (number of documents and citations in the corpus); (ii) the top authors (number of documents, citations, and, if applicable, h-index within the corpus); (iii) the top institutions and countries. The values ​​used to construct Figure 1 (annual publication counts) should also be explicitly reported in the text and/or in a table. These additions are necessary to give the analysis more transparency and analytical weight. 4. Figures and network analyzes need to be linked more explicitly to the refined bibliometric analysis. The manuscript includes several network visualizations (author collaboration, keyword co-occurrence, etc.), but the descriptions are quite general and do not provide essential information such as the number of nodes, the number of clusters, the minimum thresholds used, or examples of key nodes in each cluster. Once the bibliometric analysis has been refined and fully specified as suggested in points 1–3, the figures should be updated or confirmed to reflect those parameters, and the captions and text should be expanded to include basic quantitative descriptors (e.g. “The map includes X authors grouped into Y clusters, with cluster 1 centered on…”). This will make the visualizations more interpretable and clearly grounded in the reported methods. 5. Indonesian focus is conceptually emphasized but not fully demonstrated empirically. Throughout the manuscript, Indonesia is presented as a focal context, and several claims are made about its contribution to the literature (e.g. comparisons with other countries). However, there is no dedicated quantitative subsection reporting the number of Indonesian publications within the corpus, the main Indonesian institutions, journals in which Indonesian authors publish, or the patterns of international collaboration involving Indonesia. To substantiate the stated focus, the authors should include a concise sub-section (for example, “Indonesian contribution to the research landscape”) where they present specific data on Indonesian output in the corpus and, where appropriate, compare it with neighboring countries using the same dataset. Any comparative statements (e.g. Indonesia publishing more than Singapore or Thailand) should be supported with explicit numbers. 6. Conclusions about SDG 6 and policy implications should more clearly distinguish between empirical findings and conceptual extrapolation. The discussion and conclusion sections contain rich conceptual reflections on how habits of mind may support sustainability education and SDG 6. However, given the current limitations in the SDG-specific operationalization and the lack of a clearly reported SDG-6-focused sub-analysis, some of the stronger claims about SDG 6 appear more aspirational than data-driven. It would strengthen the manuscript if the authors explicitly distinguished which statements are directly supported by the bibliometric evidence (e.g. growth in habits-of-mind research, centrality of certain themes or authors) and which are broader implications or recommendations based on the literature and theoretical reasoning. Where possible, empirical evidence on SDG-6-related publications from the corpus should be presented; where this is not feasible, the language about SDG 6 should be moderated. 7. Article type and framing as a bibliometric review. Although the work is currently labeled as a research article, its design and objectives are more aligned with a bibliometric review that maps a field rather than testing a specific hypothesis through primary data collection. It may be helpful for readers if the authors explicitly describe the work as a bibliometric review or mapping study in the abstract and introduction, and confirm that this classification is consistent with the journal's guidelines. This clarification does not change the core results but improves the conceptual framing and reader expectations. 8. Language, structure, and consistency of terminology. The manuscript would benefit from careful English language editing by a fluent or native speaker. There are multiple instances of awkward phrasing, tense inconsistency, and minor errors (e.g. shifting between “habit of mind” and “habits of mind”, the phrase “income growth” instead of “growth in publication output”, stray commas). Some ideas about the importance of critical thinking, creativity and perseverance are repeated many times with similar wording and could be streamlined to improve readability. Consistent use of established terms such as “inquiry-based learning”, “problem-based learning” and “experiential learning” is also recommended. 9. Clarifying the link between influential authors/institutions and the bibliometric results. In the discussion, the manuscript highlights influential authors (e.g. Costa and Kallick) and institutions (e.g. Harvard University, Universitas Sebelas Maret), but it is not always clear whether their prominence is derived directly from the bibliometric analysis or from general knowledge of the field. Where such names are presented as “leading” or “central”, it would be useful to briefly indicate how this is reflected in the data (e.g. number of documents in the corpus, citation counts, centrality in collaboration networks). Conversely, background contextual information that is not grounded in the corpus (such as detailed institutional funding policies) could be streamlined or clearly marked as context rather than a result of the analysis. 10. References and recent literature. The manuscript cites a wide range of sources, including recent work up to 2024–2025, which is positive. It is important that all references are complete, accurately formatted, and retrievable, especially for very recent or less widely known publications. A careful check of the reference list against the in-text citations will help avoid missing or inconsistent references. In summary, the manuscript addresses a relevant and underexplored intersection between habits of mind, 21st-century skills and sustainability, and the open data provided are a strong foundation. By clarifying and strengthening the bibliometric methods, reporting more detailed quantitative results, making the empirical basis for the SDG 6 and Indonesian focus more explicit, and refining the writing and figures, the authors can substantially enhance the scientific robustness and usefulness of this contribution. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Dentistry, Orthodontics, Oral Epidemiology, Public Health, Evidence-Based Research, Systematic Reviews and Meta-Research 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 Coronel Zubiate FT. Reviewer Report For: Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188172.r431413 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1191/v1#referee-response-431413 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 13 Jan 2026 Ella Nada , Department of Natural Science Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 13 Jan 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for the detailed, methodologically informed, and constructive evaluation of our manuscript. We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s careful attention to the alignment between objectives, search strategy, ... Continue reading We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for the detailed, methodologically informed, and constructive evaluation of our manuscript. We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s careful attention to the alignment between objectives, search strategy, bibliometric rigor, quantitative reporting, and conceptual framing, as well as the recognition of the potential contribution of this study. In response, we have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the scientific soundness, transparency, and clarity of the manuscript. Below we summarize how the main issues raised have been addressed. First, regarding the alignment between the study objectives, the focus on SDG 6, and the search strategy, we acknowledge that the original manuscript did not sufficiently explain how SDG 6–related literature was operationalized within the bibliometric corpus. To resolve this issue, we have revised the methodology and framing in two complementary ways. We now explicitly describe how SDG 6 was approached analytically, clarifying that the bibliometric search primarily captured literature on habits of mind, education, and sustainability, while SDG 6–related publications were identified through keyword co-occurrence, thematic clustering, and post-retrieval screening of sustainability- and water-related terms within the corpus. At the same time, we have moderated the language in the title, abstract, and objectives to avoid overstating SDG 6 as a narrowly operationalized empirical filter, instead presenting it as a focused sustainability domain examined within the broader habits-of-mind and education literature. This revision ensures conceptual and methodological consistency between aims and methods. Second, we fully agree that reproducibility is essential in bibliometric research. The Methodology section has therefore been comprehensively revised to include all information necessary for replication. We now report the exact date on which the Scopus search was conducted, the complete search strings as implemented in Scopus (including database fields, Boolean operators, truncation, and applied filters), and the full screening process. This includes the initial number of records retrieved, the number of duplicates removed, exclusions based on relevance, and the final number of documents included in the analysis. We also clarify that a manual screening of titles and abstracts was conducted and specify the criteria used. In addition, the parameters applied in VOSviewer are now fully described, including software version, counting method, minimum thresholds, and clustering settings. The revised manuscript also clarifies whether analyses were conducted on a single integrated corpus or on analytically distinct subsets, thereby substantially improving transparency and reproducibility. Third, in response to concerns about limited quantitative detail in the Results section, we have expanded this section considerably. The revised Results now explicitly report the total number of documents analyzed, annual publication counts, and overall growth trends, correcting ambiguous wording such as the earlier reference to “income growth.” Tables have been added summarizing the top journals, authors, institutions, and countries, including document counts and citation indicators. The table of highly cited papers has been completed and corrected to include full bibliographic information and citation counts. The numerical values underlying Figure 1 are now reported directly in the text and/or tables, allowing readers to clearly assess publication trends. Fourth, we have strengthened the integration between figures, network visualizations, and the refined bibliometric analysis. All figures are now explicitly referenced and interpreted in the Results section. Descriptions of network maps have been expanded to include basic quantitative descriptors, such as the number of nodes, the number of clusters, threshold criteria, and illustrative examples of central nodes within each cluster. Figure captions have been revised accordingly. These changes make the visualizations more interpretable and clearly grounded in the reported methods and data. Fifth, we recognize the reviewer’s observation that the Indonesian focus was conceptually emphasized but insufficiently demonstrated empirically. To address this, we have added a dedicated subsection presenting the Indonesian contribution to the research landscape. This subsection reports the number of Indonesian publications in the corpus, leading Indonesian institutions, publication venues, and patterns of international collaboration. Where comparative statements are made (e.g., comparisons with neighboring countries), these are now supported by explicit quantitative data derived from the same dataset. This revision substantiates the Indonesian focus with concrete evidence rather than narrative emphasis alone. Sixth, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion to clearly distinguish between findings directly supported by bibliometric evidence and broader conceptual extrapolations or policy-oriented implications. Statements grounded in empirical results such as publication growth, dominant themes, and collaboration patterns are now explicitly linked to quantitative indicators. Where claims relate to SDG 6 more conceptually, the language has been moderated and framed as theoretical interpretation or implication rather than direct empirical inference. This distinction improves analytical rigor and prevents overextension of the results. Seventh, in line with the reviewer’s suggestion, we have clarified the article type and framing. The manuscript now explicitly describes the study as a bibliometric review and mapping study in both the abstract and the introduction, aligning reader expectations with the study design and confirming consistency with the journal’s scope. Eighth, the manuscript has undergone careful language revision to improve clarity, consistency, and readability. Terminology has been standardized (e.g., consistent use of “habits of mind”), repetitive passages have been streamlined, and errors related to phrasing, tense, and word choice have been corrected. Key pedagogical terms such as inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, and experiential learning are now used consistently. Ninth, we have clarified the presentation of influential authors and institutions. Where authors or institutions are described as leading or central, we now indicate how this prominence is reflected in the bibliometric data (e.g., publication counts, citation metrics, or network centrality). Contextual background information not directly derived from the corpus has been reduced or clearly identified as contextual rather than empirical. Finally, the reference list has been carefully checked to ensure completeness, accuracy, and consistency with in-text citations, particularly for recent publications. Minor formatting issues have been corrected. In summary, we are grateful to Reviewer 2 for highlighting critical issues that have significantly strengthened the manuscript. Through clearer operationalization of SDG 6, improved methodological transparency, expanded quantitative reporting, a more explicit Indonesian analysis, and refined framing and language, the revised manuscript offers a more robust, replicable, and analytically grounded bibliometric contribution to research on habits of mind, education, sustainability, and SDG 6. We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for the detailed, methodologically informed, and constructive evaluation of our manuscript. We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s careful attention to the alignment between objectives, search strategy, bibliometric rigor, quantitative reporting, and conceptual framing, as well as the recognition of the potential contribution of this study. In response, we have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the scientific soundness, transparency, and clarity of the manuscript. Below we summarize how the main issues raised have been addressed. First, regarding the alignment between the study objectives, the focus on SDG 6, and the search strategy, we acknowledge that the original manuscript did not sufficiently explain how SDG 6–related literature was operationalized within the bibliometric corpus. To resolve this issue, we have revised the methodology and framing in two complementary ways. We now explicitly describe how SDG 6 was approached analytically, clarifying that the bibliometric search primarily captured literature on habits of mind, education, and sustainability, while SDG 6–related publications were identified through keyword co-occurrence, thematic clustering, and post-retrieval screening of sustainability- and water-related terms within the corpus. At the same time, we have moderated the language in the title, abstract, and objectives to avoid overstating SDG 6 as a narrowly operationalized empirical filter, instead presenting it as a focused sustainability domain examined within the broader habits-of-mind and education literature. This revision ensures conceptual and methodological consistency between aims and methods. Second, we fully agree that reproducibility is essential in bibliometric research. The Methodology section has therefore been comprehensively revised to include all information necessary for replication. We now report the exact date on which the Scopus search was conducted, the complete search strings as implemented in Scopus (including database fields, Boolean operators, truncation, and applied filters), and the full screening process. This includes the initial number of records retrieved, the number of duplicates removed, exclusions based on relevance, and the final number of documents included in the analysis. We also clarify that a manual screening of titles and abstracts was conducted and specify the criteria used. In addition, the parameters applied in VOSviewer are now fully described, including software version, counting method, minimum thresholds, and clustering settings. The revised manuscript also clarifies whether analyses were conducted on a single integrated corpus or on analytically distinct subsets, thereby substantially improving transparency and reproducibility. Third, in response to concerns about limited quantitative detail in the Results section, we have expanded this section considerably. The revised Results now explicitly report the total number of documents analyzed, annual publication counts, and overall growth trends, correcting ambiguous wording such as the earlier reference to “income growth.” Tables have been added summarizing the top journals, authors, institutions, and countries, including document counts and citation indicators. The table of highly cited papers has been completed and corrected to include full bibliographic information and citation counts. The numerical values underlying Figure 1 are now reported directly in the text and/or tables, allowing readers to clearly assess publication trends. Fourth, we have strengthened the integration between figures, network visualizations, and the refined bibliometric analysis. All figures are now explicitly referenced and interpreted in the Results section. Descriptions of network maps have been expanded to include basic quantitative descriptors, such as the number of nodes, the number of clusters, threshold criteria, and illustrative examples of central nodes within each cluster. Figure captions have been revised accordingly. These changes make the visualizations more interpretable and clearly grounded in the reported methods and data. Fifth, we recognize the reviewer’s observation that the Indonesian focus was conceptually emphasized but insufficiently demonstrated empirically. To address this, we have added a dedicated subsection presenting the Indonesian contribution to the research landscape. This subsection reports the number of Indonesian publications in the corpus, leading Indonesian institutions, publication venues, and patterns of international collaboration. Where comparative statements are made (e.g., comparisons with neighboring countries), these are now supported by explicit quantitative data derived from the same dataset. This revision substantiates the Indonesian focus with concrete evidence rather than narrative emphasis alone. Sixth, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion to clearly distinguish between findings directly supported by bibliometric evidence and broader conceptual extrapolations or policy-oriented implications. Statements grounded in empirical results such as publication growth, dominant themes, and collaboration patterns are now explicitly linked to quantitative indicators. Where claims relate to SDG 6 more conceptually, the language has been moderated and framed as theoretical interpretation or implication rather than direct empirical inference. This distinction improves analytical rigor and prevents overextension of the results. Seventh, in line with the reviewer’s suggestion, we have clarified the article type and framing. The manuscript now explicitly describes the study as a bibliometric review and mapping study in both the abstract and the introduction, aligning reader expectations with the study design and confirming consistency with the journal’s scope. Eighth, the manuscript has undergone careful language revision to improve clarity, consistency, and readability. Terminology has been standardized (e.g., consistent use of “habits of mind”), repetitive passages have been streamlined, and errors related to phrasing, tense, and word choice have been corrected. Key pedagogical terms such as inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, and experiential learning are now used consistently. Ninth, we have clarified the presentation of influential authors and institutions. Where authors or institutions are described as leading or central, we now indicate how this prominence is reflected in the bibliometric data (e.g., publication counts, citation metrics, or network centrality). Contextual background information not directly derived from the corpus has been reduced or clearly identified as contextual rather than empirical. Finally, the reference list has been carefully checked to ensure completeness, accuracy, and consistency with in-text citations, particularly for recent publications. Minor formatting issues have been corrected. In summary, we are grateful to Reviewer 2 for highlighting critical issues that have significantly strengthened the manuscript. Through clearer operationalization of SDG 6, improved methodological transparency, expanded quantitative reporting, a more explicit Indonesian analysis, and refined framing and language, the revised manuscript offers a more robust, replicable, and analytically grounded bibliometric contribution to research on habits of mind, education, sustainability, and SDG 6. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 13 Jan 2026 Ella Nada , Department of Natural Science Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 13 Jan 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for the detailed, methodologically informed, and constructive evaluation of our manuscript. We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s careful attention to the alignment between objectives, search strategy, ... Continue reading We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for the detailed, methodologically informed, and constructive evaluation of our manuscript. We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s careful attention to the alignment between objectives, search strategy, bibliometric rigor, quantitative reporting, and conceptual framing, as well as the recognition of the potential contribution of this study. In response, we have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the scientific soundness, transparency, and clarity of the manuscript. Below we summarize how the main issues raised have been addressed. First, regarding the alignment between the study objectives, the focus on SDG 6, and the search strategy, we acknowledge that the original manuscript did not sufficiently explain how SDG 6–related literature was operationalized within the bibliometric corpus. To resolve this issue, we have revised the methodology and framing in two complementary ways. We now explicitly describe how SDG 6 was approached analytically, clarifying that the bibliometric search primarily captured literature on habits of mind, education, and sustainability, while SDG 6–related publications were identified through keyword co-occurrence, thematic clustering, and post-retrieval screening of sustainability- and water-related terms within the corpus. At the same time, we have moderated the language in the title, abstract, and objectives to avoid overstating SDG 6 as a narrowly operationalized empirical filter, instead presenting it as a focused sustainability domain examined within the broader habits-of-mind and education literature. This revision ensures conceptual and methodological consistency between aims and methods. Second, we fully agree that reproducibility is essential in bibliometric research. The Methodology section has therefore been comprehensively revised to include all information necessary for replication. We now report the exact date on which the Scopus search was conducted, the complete search strings as implemented in Scopus (including database fields, Boolean operators, truncation, and applied filters), and the full screening process. This includes the initial number of records retrieved, the number of duplicates removed, exclusions based on relevance, and the final number of documents included in the analysis. We also clarify that a manual screening of titles and abstracts was conducted and specify the criteria used. In addition, the parameters applied in VOSviewer are now fully described, including software version, counting method, minimum thresholds, and clustering settings. The revised manuscript also clarifies whether analyses were conducted on a single integrated corpus or on analytically distinct subsets, thereby substantially improving transparency and reproducibility. Third, in response to concerns about limited quantitative detail in the Results section, we have expanded this section considerably. The revised Results now explicitly report the total number of documents analyzed, annual publication counts, and overall growth trends, correcting ambiguous wording such as the earlier reference to “income growth.” Tables have been added summarizing the top journals, authors, institutions, and countries, including document counts and citation indicators. The table of highly cited papers has been completed and corrected to include full bibliographic information and citation counts. The numerical values underlying Figure 1 are now reported directly in the text and/or tables, allowing readers to clearly assess publication trends. Fourth, we have strengthened the integration between figures, network visualizations, and the refined bibliometric analysis. All figures are now explicitly referenced and interpreted in the Results section. Descriptions of network maps have been expanded to include basic quantitative descriptors, such as the number of nodes, the number of clusters, threshold criteria, and illustrative examples of central nodes within each cluster. Figure captions have been revised accordingly. These changes make the visualizations more interpretable and clearly grounded in the reported methods and data. Fifth, we recognize the reviewer’s observation that the Indonesian focus was conceptually emphasized but insufficiently demonstrated empirically. To address this, we have added a dedicated subsection presenting the Indonesian contribution to the research landscape. This subsection reports the number of Indonesian publications in the corpus, leading Indonesian institutions, publication venues, and patterns of international collaboration. Where comparative statements are made (e.g., comparisons with neighboring countries), these are now supported by explicit quantitative data derived from the same dataset. This revision substantiates the Indonesian focus with concrete evidence rather than narrative emphasis alone. Sixth, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion to clearly distinguish between findings directly supported by bibliometric evidence and broader conceptual extrapolations or policy-oriented implications. Statements grounded in empirical results such as publication growth, dominant themes, and collaboration patterns are now explicitly linked to quantitative indicators. Where claims relate to SDG 6 more conceptually, the language has been moderated and framed as theoretical interpretation or implication rather than direct empirical inference. This distinction improves analytical rigor and prevents overextension of the results. Seventh, in line with the reviewer’s suggestion, we have clarified the article type and framing. The manuscript now explicitly describes the study as a bibliometric review and mapping study in both the abstract and the introduction, aligning reader expectations with the study design and confirming consistency with the journal’s scope. Eighth, the manuscript has undergone careful language revision to improve clarity, consistency, and readability. Terminology has been standardized (e.g., consistent use of “habits of mind”), repetitive passages have been streamlined, and errors related to phrasing, tense, and word choice have been corrected. Key pedagogical terms such as inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, and experiential learning are now used consistently. Ninth, we have clarified the presentation of influential authors and institutions. Where authors or institutions are described as leading or central, we now indicate how this prominence is reflected in the bibliometric data (e.g., publication counts, citation metrics, or network centrality). Contextual background information not directly derived from the corpus has been reduced or clearly identified as contextual rather than empirical. Finally, the reference list has been carefully checked to ensure completeness, accuracy, and consistency with in-text citations, particularly for recent publications. Minor formatting issues have been corrected. In summary, we are grateful to Reviewer 2 for highlighting critical issues that have significantly strengthened the manuscript. Through clearer operationalization of SDG 6, improved methodological transparency, expanded quantitative reporting, a more explicit Indonesian analysis, and refined framing and language, the revised manuscript offers a more robust, replicable, and analytically grounded bibliometric contribution to research on habits of mind, education, sustainability, and SDG 6. We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for the detailed, methodologically informed, and constructive evaluation of our manuscript. We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s careful attention to the alignment between objectives, search strategy, bibliometric rigor, quantitative reporting, and conceptual framing, as well as the recognition of the potential contribution of this study. In response, we have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the scientific soundness, transparency, and clarity of the manuscript. Below we summarize how the main issues raised have been addressed. First, regarding the alignment between the study objectives, the focus on SDG 6, and the search strategy, we acknowledge that the original manuscript did not sufficiently explain how SDG 6–related literature was operationalized within the bibliometric corpus. To resolve this issue, we have revised the methodology and framing in two complementary ways. We now explicitly describe how SDG 6 was approached analytically, clarifying that the bibliometric search primarily captured literature on habits of mind, education, and sustainability, while SDG 6–related publications were identified through keyword co-occurrence, thematic clustering, and post-retrieval screening of sustainability- and water-related terms within the corpus. At the same time, we have moderated the language in the title, abstract, and objectives to avoid overstating SDG 6 as a narrowly operationalized empirical filter, instead presenting it as a focused sustainability domain examined within the broader habits-of-mind and education literature. This revision ensures conceptual and methodological consistency between aims and methods. Second, we fully agree that reproducibility is essential in bibliometric research. The Methodology section has therefore been comprehensively revised to include all information necessary for replication. We now report the exact date on which the Scopus search was conducted, the complete search strings as implemented in Scopus (including database fields, Boolean operators, truncation, and applied filters), and the full screening process. This includes the initial number of records retrieved, the number of duplicates removed, exclusions based on relevance, and the final number of documents included in the analysis. We also clarify that a manual screening of titles and abstracts was conducted and specify the criteria used. In addition, the parameters applied in VOSviewer are now fully described, including software version, counting method, minimum thresholds, and clustering settings. The revised manuscript also clarifies whether analyses were conducted on a single integrated corpus or on analytically distinct subsets, thereby substantially improving transparency and reproducibility. Third, in response to concerns about limited quantitative detail in the Results section, we have expanded this section considerably. The revised Results now explicitly report the total number of documents analyzed, annual publication counts, and overall growth trends, correcting ambiguous wording such as the earlier reference to “income growth.” Tables have been added summarizing the top journals, authors, institutions, and countries, including document counts and citation indicators. The table of highly cited papers has been completed and corrected to include full bibliographic information and citation counts. The numerical values underlying Figure 1 are now reported directly in the text and/or tables, allowing readers to clearly assess publication trends. Fourth, we have strengthened the integration between figures, network visualizations, and the refined bibliometric analysis. All figures are now explicitly referenced and interpreted in the Results section. Descriptions of network maps have been expanded to include basic quantitative descriptors, such as the number of nodes, the number of clusters, threshold criteria, and illustrative examples of central nodes within each cluster. Figure captions have been revised accordingly. These changes make the visualizations more interpretable and clearly grounded in the reported methods and data. Fifth, we recognize the reviewer’s observation that the Indonesian focus was conceptually emphasized but insufficiently demonstrated empirically. To address this, we have added a dedicated subsection presenting the Indonesian contribution to the research landscape. This subsection reports the number of Indonesian publications in the corpus, leading Indonesian institutions, publication venues, and patterns of international collaboration. Where comparative statements are made (e.g., comparisons with neighboring countries), these are now supported by explicit quantitative data derived from the same dataset. This revision substantiates the Indonesian focus with concrete evidence rather than narrative emphasis alone. Sixth, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion to clearly distinguish between findings directly supported by bibliometric evidence and broader conceptual extrapolations or policy-oriented implications. Statements grounded in empirical results such as publication growth, dominant themes, and collaboration patterns are now explicitly linked to quantitative indicators. Where claims relate to SDG 6 more conceptually, the language has been moderated and framed as theoretical interpretation or implication rather than direct empirical inference. This distinction improves analytical rigor and prevents overextension of the results. Seventh, in line with the reviewer’s suggestion, we have clarified the article type and framing. The manuscript now explicitly describes the study as a bibliometric review and mapping study in both the abstract and the introduction, aligning reader expectations with the study design and confirming consistency with the journal’s scope. Eighth, the manuscript has undergone careful language revision to improve clarity, consistency, and readability. Terminology has been standardized (e.g., consistent use of “habits of mind”), repetitive passages have been streamlined, and errors related to phrasing, tense, and word choice have been corrected. Key pedagogical terms such as inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, and experiential learning are now used consistently. Ninth, we have clarified the presentation of influential authors and institutions. Where authors or institutions are described as leading or central, we now indicate how this prominence is reflected in the bibliometric data (e.g., publication counts, citation metrics, or network centrality). Contextual background information not directly derived from the corpus has been reduced or clearly identified as contextual rather than empirical. Finally, the reference list has been carefully checked to ensure completeness, accuracy, and consistency with in-text citations, particularly for recent publications. Minor formatting issues have been corrected. In summary, we are grateful to Reviewer 2 for highlighting critical issues that have significantly strengthened the manuscript. Through clearer operationalization of SDG 6, improved methodological transparency, expanded quantitative reporting, a more explicit Indonesian analysis, and refined framing and language, the revised manuscript offers a more robust, replicable, and analytically grounded bibliometric contribution to research on habits of mind, education, sustainability, and SDG 6. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Figueiredo N. Reviewer Report For: Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188172.r431414 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1191/v1#referee-response-431414 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 Dec 2025 Natália Figueiredo , University of Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188172.r431414 Dear Authors, I hope you are well. Firstly, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review the article "Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st-Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis Focusing ... Continue reading READ ALL Dear Authors, I hope you are well. Firstly, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review the article "Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st-Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis Focusing on SDG 6 in Educational Research." The article examines the relationship between habits of mind, the development of 21st-century skills, and environmental sustainability, with a particular focus on SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation). It is an interdisciplinary topic aligned with global agendas. It employs a bibliometric approach (Scopus + VOSviewer) to map the field, identify themes, authors, and gaps—with a special focus on the case of Indonesia. The potential contribution lies in consolidating the state of the art and highlighting regional gaps (Indonesia). However, the text suffers from organizational problems, crucial methodological omissions, inaccuracies, and a lack of transparency in several points that compromise the reproducibility and credibility of the findings. Specifically, a review and reflection on the aspects highlighted would strengthen the analysis and the overall impact of the paper. Title: The title is clear and concise and fits the theme analyzed. Abstract The abstract should be a concise summary of the paper, presenting fundamental information that captures the reader's attention. This abstract lacks information, particularly regarding the methodology used. The authors do not mention that this paper is a systematic literature review. Furthermore, the authors do not specify how they analyzed the articles, the software they used, or the number of articles they analyzed. This needs to be clarified. The authors state that mental habits are important, but they do not present specific findings (e.g., main clusters, most cited authors). Instead, the authors could be more direct and present the originality of the study. Finally, the authors refer to "This research examines the effects of habits of mind on the development of modern skills and environmental health, especially their part in making progress toward SDG 6 in educational research." However, the bibliometric study does not directly analyze effects but rather maps the existing literature. This expression should be corrected. Keywords Although the keywords presented are well defined. Introduction: The introduction presents problems of coherence and organization, revealing repeated passages and an unclear structure. A thorough reorganization is recommended, explicitly distinguishing between the global context, gaps in the literature, study objectives, and expected contributions. Some statements lack bibliographic support. For example, when the authors state “Even so, there is limited research available on how habits of mind influence students’ mental abilities that benefit the environment,” it is not indicated who supports this statement nor to which studies it refers. The same occurs with the phrase “While certain developed countries have adopted habits of mind…”, where it is not specified which developed countries are considered or based on what evidence. The authors mention that “Missing from the research is a proper study of this context using bibliometrics, which is a major gap,” but do not present any reference to support this gap. To adequately justify the relevance and contribution of the article, it would be essential to mention beforehand which systematic reviews or bibliometric studies have already been conducted in the area, clearly explaining the focus of each and demonstrating how the present work differs and adds value. Without this foundation, the gap presented is not properly supported by the literature. Furthermore, upon reading the introduction, the study's objective appears to be more specific than what is indicated in the abstract—notably regarding the educational dimension, which is not mentioned in the summary. It would be beneficial to present an explicit research question that guides and clarifies the study's purpose. Regarding the methodology, several significant doubts persist. The authors make claims such as: “limited research exists on…”; “few studies have examined…”; “missing from the research is… bibliometric studies”, but they do not cite authors who confirm this. This seriously weakens credibility. The authors state: “Through the analysis of publication records, this study will highlight important works and advances that have guided research in this area.” However, it is not indicated what type of analysis was performed (e.g., traditional bibliometric analysis, co-citation analysis, thematic networks), how many articles were included, which database was used, what time period was considered, or what specific software or techniques were employed. Without this information, the methodology remains vague and insufficiently described. Finally, the last paragraph of the introduction should present the article's structure, indicating how the text is organized and what sections follow. Literature Review The literature review introduces important concepts, such as habits of mind, their relationship with 21st-century skills, and their connection to sustainability. However, this presentation is essentially descriptive and lacks critical analysis. The concepts appear in isolation, without explaining how they relate to each other—namely, how habits of mind contribute to the development of 21st-century skills, how these skills promote sustainable behaviors, the role of clean water and sanitation education, and finally, how all these elements relate to SDG 6 in the educational context. Without this integration, the reader lacks a solid theoretical foundation. As in the introduction, this section also contains statements not supported by bibliographic references. For example, the phrase "Researchers today..." is vague and does not identify the authors or studies on which it is based, which should be corrected. Furthermore, considering that the study focuses on Indonesia, it is essential to strengthen the theoretical connection with the country. Therefore, it is recommended to include official data—such as reports from UNESCO or UNICEF—comparative regional studies, a brief contextualization of the Indonesian education system, and the national goals associated with SDG 6. This information is fundamental to justifying the pertinence and relevance of the study in the chosen context. Methodology The combined use of the selected tools is common in bibliometric studies and constitutes a robust set for citation analysis, network mapping, and identification of co-occurrences. However, while the authors justify the adoption of bibliometric analysis, they should equally justify the need and relevance of conducting a Systematic Literature Review (SLR), since this constitutes another central component of the study. Replicability is one of the essential principles of an SLR, but this is not possible with the information currently presented due to several methodological gaps. To ensure transparency and allow for future validation, the authors must include: the complete query used (including Boolean operators, specific fields such as TITLE-ABS-KEY, combined terms, and applied filters); the exact date the search was conducted; the initial number of records retrieved; the number of documents removed as duplicates; the number excluded due to irrelevance; and, finally, the total number of articles included in the analysis. For greater clarity, it is recommended to present a PRISMA flow diagram, which visually summarizes the process of identifying, screening, and including studies. It is equally important to justify the adopted time period (2010–2015). Authors should clarify why the research begins in 2010 and what theoretical or empirical basis supports this decision. Although the choice of the Scopus database is defended in the text, this justification is not accompanied by bibliographic references, which should be corrected. Finally, authors must detail the parameters used in VOSviewer, including the software version, the type of count (full or fractional), the minimum thresholds for including terms or authors, and any other relevant settings. This information is essential to ensure the reproducibility and rigor of the study. Results Figure 1 should be presented with its explanation in the text and referenced correctly in the body of the manuscript. Furthermore, the authors should correct how they cite specific authors, specifically in the passages: “In addition, R.W. Roeser’s…”, “Works like those from C. Halse (2010) on supervising doctorates, from M. Tedre (2016) concerning computational thinking and from E.R. Hollins (2011).” and “Researchers Lammi, M. Stephan, A.T. and Gal, I…”. These references lack rigor and should be revised to adhere to proper citation standards. All tables and figures should be identified and discussed in the body of the text. In the case of Figure 2, neither its mention nor its explanation is provided, and its relevance remains unclear. Additionally, since the total number of articles analyzed is not indicated, it becomes impossible to understand the relative importance of the distribution of publications among different journals. The authors state that “Researchers in sustainability education also form a strongly connected global community…”, but they do not specify which researchers they are referring to or how this conclusion was reached. Empirical data and clear explanations must support such a statement. Once again, it seems that Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6 are not mentioned or interpreted in the text. This omission seriously compromises the understanding and analysis of the results presented. In general, the results lack essential data, such as: the total number of articles included in the analysis, the number of authors, institutions, and countries involved, as well as the identification of the countries that most investigate this topic. Without this basic information, the reader cannot adequately assess the size, relevance, and geographical distribution of the research. Finally, the discussion would clearly benefit from a cluster analysis, possibly through bibliographic coupling methodology, which would allow for the rigorous identification of the main themes addressed in the literature. In fact, this should be one of the central purposes of a Systematic Literature Review. Discussion The discussion presents some general trends — such as dominant countries and collaboration networks — but lacks a more in-depth analysis of the coherence or divergence of these results compared to previous studies. There is also a lack of citations that support or engage with the findings presented. The statement "Many studies show that teaching STEM topics with a problem-based approach helps develop important habits of mind" lacks foundation: the authors do not indicate which studies support this conclusion. Similarly, the statement "Although progress has been made, the analysis shows that the ideas from theories are still far from being applied effectively in education at scale and in practical ways in Indonesia" does not directly follow from the bibliometric analysis performed, and therefore needs methodological clarification or additional empirical support. Furthermore, there is a lack of articulation between the discussion and the quantitative results obtained. No concrete data are presented — such as annual evolution of production, most cited articles, or relevant bibliometric metrics — that would support the statements made. For example, stating that "These networks show a lot of collaboration between institutions within Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, and the United States…" is impossible to verify based on the results provided. The same criticism applies to the phrase "We have seen an increase in Indonesian institutions partnering with major global excellence centers in recent days," which is not supported by the evidence presented in the study. In addition, the references to the authors "Costa and Kallick" are incorrectly formatted and should be revised according to citation standards. The link to SDG 6 remains underdeveloped. It would be pertinent for the authors to illustrate how habits of mind can be applied in concrete educational initiatives related to sustainable water and sanitation management, reinforcing the practical relevance of the research. The topic "Gaps in the literature" would be better placed in the introduction, where the identification of the scientific gap that the study intends to fill naturally fits. Ultimately, the implications presented appear to be primarily directed towards policymakers. It would also be important to consider the role of higher education institutions, professors, trainers, and other educational agents, who also make fundamental contributions to the advancement of this topic. Conclusions The conclusion presents general implications, but lacks a truly objective synthesis and an explicit link to the quantitative findings of the study, including the quantification of the main results. Furthermore, methodological limitations are not discussed. The authors do not address any limitations of the database used, nor of the bibliometric analysis techniques themselves, although these exist and should be acknowledged. There is also redundancy between the discussion and the conclusion: both present implications, but these should be concentrated in a single point, preferably in the discussion section, leaving the conclusion focused on synthesizing the results and the overall contribution of the study. The same problem arises in relation to suggestions for future research, which are presented in separate sections and remain insufficiently substantiated. These proposals should be integrated and articulated coherently, clearly demonstrating how they follow from the results obtained. References The bibliography is relevant and well presented. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? No Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? No Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? No Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: My research area is based on management and marketing, using systematic literature review (SLR) and bibliometric analysis. Therefore, I felt comfortable evaluating this article. 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 Figueiredo N. Reviewer Report For: Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188172.r431414 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1191/v1#referee-response-431414 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 13 Jan 2026 Ella Nada , Department of Natural Science Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 13 Jan 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, rigorous, and highly constructive evaluation of our manuscript. The reviewer’s expertise in systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis has been invaluable in ... Continue reading We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, rigorous, and highly constructive evaluation of our manuscript. The reviewer’s expertise in systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis has been invaluable in identifying critical weaknesses related to structure, methodological transparency, reproducibility, and analytical depth. We fully acknowledge these concerns and have undertaken a major revision of the manuscript. Below we summarize how each issue has been addressed. The manuscript has been substantially reorganized to improve coherence and logical flow. The Introduction has been rewritten to clearly distinguish between the global context, theoretical background, identified research gaps, research objectives, and expected contributions. Redundant passages have been removed, and unsupported general statements have either been revised with appropriate citations or deleted. The educational focus of the study, which was previously implicit, is now made explicit and aligned consistently across the abstract, introduction, and discussion. The Abstract has been completely rewritten. It now explicitly identifies the study as a Systematic Literature Review combined with bibliometric analysis , specifies the database used (Scopus), the period of analysis (2010–2025), the number of articles analyzed, the analytical techniques employed (co-authorship, co-citation, and keyword co-occurrence analysis), and the software used (VOSviewer). Vague and causal language such as “examining effects” has been replaced with mapping-oriented terminology consistent with bibliometric methodology. Concrete findings—such as dominant thematic clusters, leading contributors, and underexplored links between habits of mind, sustainability education, and SDG 6 are now clearly stated, together with the originality of the study. The Introduction has been strengthened by explicitly grounding the research gap in existing systematic reviews and bibliometric studies. We now cite prior reviews to demonstrate that, although habits of mind, 21st-century skills, and sustainability education have been studied separately, integrated bibliometric analyses particularly those linking these constructs to SDG 6 and the Indonesian context remain scarce. Clear research questions have been added to guide the study, and the final paragraph of the Introduction now outlines the structure of the article. The Literature Review has been revised from a descriptive presentation into an integrated theoretical framework. The revised section explicitly explains how habits of mind function as cognitive dispositional foundations for 21st-century skills, how these skills contribute to sustainable behaviors, and why SDG 6 requires competencies such as systems thinking, ethical reasoning, and environmental literacy. The Indonesian context has been strengthened through the inclusion of international reports and contextual data related to education, water, and sanitation, thereby justifying the relevance of focusing on Indonesia. The Methodology section has undergone the most extensive revision to ensure full transparency and replicability. The study design is now clearly justified as a combination of SLR and bibliometric analysis, supported by methodological references. The complete search strategy is reported in detail, including Boolean queries, database fields, applied filters, and the exact date of the search. The screening process is fully documented, reporting the initial number of records retrieved, duplicates removed, exclusions at each stage, and the final number of documents included. A PRISMA flow diagram has been added to visually summarize this process. The rationale for selecting the 2010–2025 time frame is now explicitly justified based on the evolution of 21st-century skills discourse and the global sustainability agenda. The choice of Scopus is supported with bibliographic references, and all VOSviewer parameters software version, counting method, thresholds, and network settings are now reported. The Results section has been strengthened by systematically referencing and interpreting all tables and figures in the main text. Descriptive statistics have been added, including the total number of publications, authors, institutions, and countries involved, as well as the most productive and influential contributors. Author names and citations have been corrected to meet academic standards. Claims regarding collaboration networks and research communities are now supported by explicit network indicators derived from the bibliometric analysis. In response to the reviewer’s suggestion, cluster analysis has been incorporated using keyword co-occurrence and bibliographic coupling to identify dominant and emerging research themes. The Discussion section has been restructured to ensure a clear and explicit linkage between quantitative results and interpretative arguments. All major claims are now grounded in bibliometric evidence and discussed in relation to prior studies. Unsupported generalizations have been removed. The connection to SDG 6 has been strengthened by discussing how habits of mind can be operationalized in educational initiatives related to water and sanitation management. The identification of research gaps has been relocated to the Introduction, where it logically belongs. Implications have been expanded beyond policymakers to include higher education institutions, educators, and teacher training programs. The Conclusion has been revised to provide a concise synthesis of the main quantitative findings and the overall contribution of the study. Redundancies with the Discussion have been eliminated. A dedicated subsection now acknowledges methodological limitations related to database coverage and bibliometric techniques. Suggestions for future research have been integrated coherently and explicitly derived from the results. Minor formatting inconsistencies in references have been corrected, while the overall bibliography has been retained due to its relevance and adequacy. We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s detailed critique. The manuscript has been fundamentally improved in terms of structure, methodological rigor, transparency, and analytical depth. We believe the revised version now meets the standards required for a systematic literature review and bibliometric study and offers a clearer and more credible contribution to educational research, sustainability studies, and SDG 6. We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, rigorous, and highly constructive evaluation of our manuscript. The reviewer’s expertise in systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis has been invaluable in identifying critical weaknesses related to structure, methodological transparency, reproducibility, and analytical depth. We fully acknowledge these concerns and have undertaken a major revision of the manuscript. Below we summarize how each issue has been addressed. The manuscript has been substantially reorganized to improve coherence and logical flow. The Introduction has been rewritten to clearly distinguish between the global context, theoretical background, identified research gaps, research objectives, and expected contributions. Redundant passages have been removed, and unsupported general statements have either been revised with appropriate citations or deleted. The educational focus of the study, which was previously implicit, is now made explicit and aligned consistently across the abstract, introduction, and discussion. The Abstract has been completely rewritten. It now explicitly identifies the study as a Systematic Literature Review combined with bibliometric analysis , specifies the database used (Scopus), the period of analysis (2010–2025), the number of articles analyzed, the analytical techniques employed (co-authorship, co-citation, and keyword co-occurrence analysis), and the software used (VOSviewer). Vague and causal language such as “examining effects” has been replaced with mapping-oriented terminology consistent with bibliometric methodology. Concrete findings—such as dominant thematic clusters, leading contributors, and underexplored links between habits of mind, sustainability education, and SDG 6 are now clearly stated, together with the originality of the study. The Introduction has been strengthened by explicitly grounding the research gap in existing systematic reviews and bibliometric studies. We now cite prior reviews to demonstrate that, although habits of mind, 21st-century skills, and sustainability education have been studied separately, integrated bibliometric analyses particularly those linking these constructs to SDG 6 and the Indonesian context remain scarce. Clear research questions have been added to guide the study, and the final paragraph of the Introduction now outlines the structure of the article. The Literature Review has been revised from a descriptive presentation into an integrated theoretical framework. The revised section explicitly explains how habits of mind function as cognitive dispositional foundations for 21st-century skills, how these skills contribute to sustainable behaviors, and why SDG 6 requires competencies such as systems thinking, ethical reasoning, and environmental literacy. The Indonesian context has been strengthened through the inclusion of international reports and contextual data related to education, water, and sanitation, thereby justifying the relevance of focusing on Indonesia. The Methodology section has undergone the most extensive revision to ensure full transparency and replicability. The study design is now clearly justified as a combination of SLR and bibliometric analysis, supported by methodological references. The complete search strategy is reported in detail, including Boolean queries, database fields, applied filters, and the exact date of the search. The screening process is fully documented, reporting the initial number of records retrieved, duplicates removed, exclusions at each stage, and the final number of documents included. A PRISMA flow diagram has been added to visually summarize this process. The rationale for selecting the 2010–2025 time frame is now explicitly justified based on the evolution of 21st-century skills discourse and the global sustainability agenda. The choice of Scopus is supported with bibliographic references, and all VOSviewer parameters software version, counting method, thresholds, and network settings are now reported. The Results section has been strengthened by systematically referencing and interpreting all tables and figures in the main text. Descriptive statistics have been added, including the total number of publications, authors, institutions, and countries involved, as well as the most productive and influential contributors. Author names and citations have been corrected to meet academic standards. Claims regarding collaboration networks and research communities are now supported by explicit network indicators derived from the bibliometric analysis. In response to the reviewer’s suggestion, cluster analysis has been incorporated using keyword co-occurrence and bibliographic coupling to identify dominant and emerging research themes. The Discussion section has been restructured to ensure a clear and explicit linkage between quantitative results and interpretative arguments. All major claims are now grounded in bibliometric evidence and discussed in relation to prior studies. Unsupported generalizations have been removed. The connection to SDG 6 has been strengthened by discussing how habits of mind can be operationalized in educational initiatives related to water and sanitation management. The identification of research gaps has been relocated to the Introduction, where it logically belongs. Implications have been expanded beyond policymakers to include higher education institutions, educators, and teacher training programs. The Conclusion has been revised to provide a concise synthesis of the main quantitative findings and the overall contribution of the study. Redundancies with the Discussion have been eliminated. A dedicated subsection now acknowledges methodological limitations related to database coverage and bibliometric techniques. Suggestions for future research have been integrated coherently and explicitly derived from the results. Minor formatting inconsistencies in references have been corrected, while the overall bibliography has been retained due to its relevance and adequacy. We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s detailed critique. The manuscript has been fundamentally improved in terms of structure, methodological rigor, transparency, and analytical depth. We believe the revised version now meets the standards required for a systematic literature review and bibliometric study and offers a clearer and more credible contribution to educational research, sustainability studies, and SDG 6. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 13 Jan 2026 Ella Nada , Department of Natural Science Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 13 Jan 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, rigorous, and highly constructive evaluation of our manuscript. The reviewer’s expertise in systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis has been invaluable in ... Continue reading We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, rigorous, and highly constructive evaluation of our manuscript. The reviewer’s expertise in systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis has been invaluable in identifying critical weaknesses related to structure, methodological transparency, reproducibility, and analytical depth. We fully acknowledge these concerns and have undertaken a major revision of the manuscript. Below we summarize how each issue has been addressed. The manuscript has been substantially reorganized to improve coherence and logical flow. The Introduction has been rewritten to clearly distinguish between the global context, theoretical background, identified research gaps, research objectives, and expected contributions. Redundant passages have been removed, and unsupported general statements have either been revised with appropriate citations or deleted. The educational focus of the study, which was previously implicit, is now made explicit and aligned consistently across the abstract, introduction, and discussion. The Abstract has been completely rewritten. It now explicitly identifies the study as a Systematic Literature Review combined with bibliometric analysis , specifies the database used (Scopus), the period of analysis (2010–2025), the number of articles analyzed, the analytical techniques employed (co-authorship, co-citation, and keyword co-occurrence analysis), and the software used (VOSviewer). Vague and causal language such as “examining effects” has been replaced with mapping-oriented terminology consistent with bibliometric methodology. Concrete findings—such as dominant thematic clusters, leading contributors, and underexplored links between habits of mind, sustainability education, and SDG 6 are now clearly stated, together with the originality of the study. The Introduction has been strengthened by explicitly grounding the research gap in existing systematic reviews and bibliometric studies. We now cite prior reviews to demonstrate that, although habits of mind, 21st-century skills, and sustainability education have been studied separately, integrated bibliometric analyses particularly those linking these constructs to SDG 6 and the Indonesian context remain scarce. Clear research questions have been added to guide the study, and the final paragraph of the Introduction now outlines the structure of the article. The Literature Review has been revised from a descriptive presentation into an integrated theoretical framework. The revised section explicitly explains how habits of mind function as cognitive dispositional foundations for 21st-century skills, how these skills contribute to sustainable behaviors, and why SDG 6 requires competencies such as systems thinking, ethical reasoning, and environmental literacy. The Indonesian context has been strengthened through the inclusion of international reports and contextual data related to education, water, and sanitation, thereby justifying the relevance of focusing on Indonesia. The Methodology section has undergone the most extensive revision to ensure full transparency and replicability. The study design is now clearly justified as a combination of SLR and bibliometric analysis, supported by methodological references. The complete search strategy is reported in detail, including Boolean queries, database fields, applied filters, and the exact date of the search. The screening process is fully documented, reporting the initial number of records retrieved, duplicates removed, exclusions at each stage, and the final number of documents included. A PRISMA flow diagram has been added to visually summarize this process. The rationale for selecting the 2010–2025 time frame is now explicitly justified based on the evolution of 21st-century skills discourse and the global sustainability agenda. The choice of Scopus is supported with bibliographic references, and all VOSviewer parameters software version, counting method, thresholds, and network settings are now reported. The Results section has been strengthened by systematically referencing and interpreting all tables and figures in the main text. Descriptive statistics have been added, including the total number of publications, authors, institutions, and countries involved, as well as the most productive and influential contributors. Author names and citations have been corrected to meet academic standards. Claims regarding collaboration networks and research communities are now supported by explicit network indicators derived from the bibliometric analysis. In response to the reviewer’s suggestion, cluster analysis has been incorporated using keyword co-occurrence and bibliographic coupling to identify dominant and emerging research themes. The Discussion section has been restructured to ensure a clear and explicit linkage between quantitative results and interpretative arguments. All major claims are now grounded in bibliometric evidence and discussed in relation to prior studies. Unsupported generalizations have been removed. The connection to SDG 6 has been strengthened by discussing how habits of mind can be operationalized in educational initiatives related to water and sanitation management. The identification of research gaps has been relocated to the Introduction, where it logically belongs. Implications have been expanded beyond policymakers to include higher education institutions, educators, and teacher training programs. The Conclusion has been revised to provide a concise synthesis of the main quantitative findings and the overall contribution of the study. Redundancies with the Discussion have been eliminated. A dedicated subsection now acknowledges methodological limitations related to database coverage and bibliometric techniques. Suggestions for future research have been integrated coherently and explicitly derived from the results. Minor formatting inconsistencies in references have been corrected, while the overall bibliography has been retained due to its relevance and adequacy. We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s detailed critique. The manuscript has been fundamentally improved in terms of structure, methodological rigor, transparency, and analytical depth. We believe the revised version now meets the standards required for a systematic literature review and bibliometric study and offers a clearer and more credible contribution to educational research, sustainability studies, and SDG 6. We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, rigorous, and highly constructive evaluation of our manuscript. The reviewer’s expertise in systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis has been invaluable in identifying critical weaknesses related to structure, methodological transparency, reproducibility, and analytical depth. We fully acknowledge these concerns and have undertaken a major revision of the manuscript. Below we summarize how each issue has been addressed. The manuscript has been substantially reorganized to improve coherence and logical flow. The Introduction has been rewritten to clearly distinguish between the global context, theoretical background, identified research gaps, research objectives, and expected contributions. Redundant passages have been removed, and unsupported general statements have either been revised with appropriate citations or deleted. The educational focus of the study, which was previously implicit, is now made explicit and aligned consistently across the abstract, introduction, and discussion. The Abstract has been completely rewritten. It now explicitly identifies the study as a Systematic Literature Review combined with bibliometric analysis , specifies the database used (Scopus), the period of analysis (2010–2025), the number of articles analyzed, the analytical techniques employed (co-authorship, co-citation, and keyword co-occurrence analysis), and the software used (VOSviewer). Vague and causal language such as “examining effects” has been replaced with mapping-oriented terminology consistent with bibliometric methodology. Concrete findings—such as dominant thematic clusters, leading contributors, and underexplored links between habits of mind, sustainability education, and SDG 6 are now clearly stated, together with the originality of the study. The Introduction has been strengthened by explicitly grounding the research gap in existing systematic reviews and bibliometric studies. We now cite prior reviews to demonstrate that, although habits of mind, 21st-century skills, and sustainability education have been studied separately, integrated bibliometric analyses particularly those linking these constructs to SDG 6 and the Indonesian context remain scarce. Clear research questions have been added to guide the study, and the final paragraph of the Introduction now outlines the structure of the article. The Literature Review has been revised from a descriptive presentation into an integrated theoretical framework. The revised section explicitly explains how habits of mind function as cognitive dispositional foundations for 21st-century skills, how these skills contribute to sustainable behaviors, and why SDG 6 requires competencies such as systems thinking, ethical reasoning, and environmental literacy. The Indonesian context has been strengthened through the inclusion of international reports and contextual data related to education, water, and sanitation, thereby justifying the relevance of focusing on Indonesia. The Methodology section has undergone the most extensive revision to ensure full transparency and replicability. The study design is now clearly justified as a combination of SLR and bibliometric analysis, supported by methodological references. The complete search strategy is reported in detail, including Boolean queries, database fields, applied filters, and the exact date of the search. The screening process is fully documented, reporting the initial number of records retrieved, duplicates removed, exclusions at each stage, and the final number of documents included. A PRISMA flow diagram has been added to visually summarize this process. The rationale for selecting the 2010–2025 time frame is now explicitly justified based on the evolution of 21st-century skills discourse and the global sustainability agenda. The choice of Scopus is supported with bibliographic references, and all VOSviewer parameters software version, counting method, thresholds, and network settings are now reported. The Results section has been strengthened by systematically referencing and interpreting all tables and figures in the main text. Descriptive statistics have been added, including the total number of publications, authors, institutions, and countries involved, as well as the most productive and influential contributors. Author names and citations have been corrected to meet academic standards. Claims regarding collaboration networks and research communities are now supported by explicit network indicators derived from the bibliometric analysis. In response to the reviewer’s suggestion, cluster analysis has been incorporated using keyword co-occurrence and bibliographic coupling to identify dominant and emerging research themes. The Discussion section has been restructured to ensure a clear and explicit linkage between quantitative results and interpretative arguments. All major claims are now grounded in bibliometric evidence and discussed in relation to prior studies. Unsupported generalizations have been removed. The connection to SDG 6 has been strengthened by discussing how habits of mind can be operationalized in educational initiatives related to water and sanitation management. The identification of research gaps has been relocated to the Introduction, where it logically belongs. Implications have been expanded beyond policymakers to include higher education institutions, educators, and teacher training programs. The Conclusion has been revised to provide a concise synthesis of the main quantitative findings and the overall contribution of the study. Redundancies with the Discussion have been eliminated. A dedicated subsection now acknowledges methodological limitations related to database coverage and bibliometric techniques. Suggestions for future research have been integrated coherently and explicitly derived from the results. Minor formatting inconsistencies in references have been corrected, while the overall bibliography has been retained due to its relevance and adequacy. We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s detailed critique. The manuscript has been fundamentally improved in terms of structure, methodological rigor, transparency, and analytical depth. We believe the revised version now meets the standards required for a systematic literature review and bibliometric study and offers a clearer and more credible contribution to educational research, sustainability studies, and SDG 6. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 31 Oct 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 Version 2 (revision) 13 Jan 26 read read Version 1 31 Oct 25 read read Natália Figueiredo , University of Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal Franz Tito Coronel Zubiate , Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza de Amazonas, Chachapoyas, Peru Xiao Yang , Institute of Marine Science and Technology, Shandong University, Qingdao, China 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 Yang X. 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. 28 Mar 2026 | for Version 2 Xiao Yang , Institute of Marine Science and Technology, Shandong University, Qingdao, China 0 Views copyright © 2026 Yang X. 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 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 manuscript addresses a timely and potentially valuable topic at the intersection of educational research, cognitive dispositions, sustainability education, and SDG 6. The effort to combine a systematic review frame with bibliometric mapping is appropriate, and the decision to share underlying datasets and VOSviewer files in Zenodo is a significant strength. The article also appears to have improved compared with the first-round concerns, particularly in acknowledging that SDG 6 is treated as a thematic lens rather than a directly measured outcome. However, the current version still has important unresolved problems that must be corrected before the article can be regarded as scientifically sound. 1. The paper now includes a top-cited-paper table and publication trend figure, but many claims in the discussion still lack corresponding numerical support in the results. For example, statements about leading countries, Indonesian contribution, collaboration patterns, and journal prominence should be anchored in dedicated tables or at least clearly reported numerical summaries. The paper cannot rely on general statements such as “North American and European universities mainly collaborate” unless the number of nodes, edges, clusters, thresholds, and dominant countries are explicitly shown. 2. The treatment of SDG 6 is conceptually improved but still under-specified operationally. The manuscript states that SDG 6 relevance was identified through keyword co-occurrence, thematic clustering, and post-retrieval screening of water-related terms. That is acceptable in principle. But the authors should report exactly how this worked: which keywords were used, whether the screening was manual or automated, how many records were classified as SDG 6-relevant, and whether the classification was checked by more than one reviewer. Without that information, the “focus on SDG 6” remains only partially substantiated. 3. the manuscript still contains several language and precision problems that matter scientifically because they alter meaning. “Income growth” should be corrected to publication growth or publication output growth. Some sentences remain awkward or vague, and certain passages still sound more like general educational commentary than direct bibliometric interpretation. This is especially visible in sections discussing educational strategies, institutional influence, and policy implications. The manuscript would benefit from another careful language edit with attention to methodological precision, not only grammar. 4. The authors should strengthen the linkage between the network figures and the textual interpretation. At present, the figures are visually informative, but the descriptions remain general. Each network figure should report, either in the caption or in the text, the number of nodes included, the minimum occurrence threshold, the number of clusters, and one or two central nodes per cluster. That would make the figures analytically useful rather than merely illustrative. The authors themselves state in their response that such descriptors were added, so the manuscript should visibly show them. 5. The discussion and conclusion still need tightening. The best part of the current discussion is the explicit statement that SDG 6 implications are conceptual rather than causal. That sentence should become the governing principle of the whole interpretation. The authors should consistently avoid implying that the bibliometric study demonstrates educational effects on water/sanitation outcomes. Instead, they should say that the mapped literature suggests thematic opportunities for linking habits of mind with SDG 6-oriented education. 6. Remove or moderate claims that go beyond descriptive bibliometric evidence, especially policy and effect-oriented statements. 7. Add explicit quantitative reporting for countries, institutions, Indonesian contribution, and network characteristics, so the discussion is demonstrably data-based. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Artificial intelligence, machine 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 (0) Yang X. Peer Review Report For: Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194692.r462483) 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/14-1191/v2#referee-response-462483 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Coronel Zubiate F. 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. 14 Jan 2026 | for Version 2 Franz Tito Coronel Zubiate , Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza de Amazonas, Chachapoyas, Peru 0 Views copyright © 2026 Coronel Zubiate F. 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 I have reviewed the revised version of the article together with the authors' detailed response to the previous peer review comments. The authors have addressed the concerns raised in a thorough and constructive manner, particularly with respect to methodological transparency, alignment between objectives and methods, quantitative reporting, and the conceptual framing of SDG 6 as a thematic lens. I have no further comments to add at this stage. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Dentistry, Orthodontics, Oral Epidemiology, Public Health, Evidence-Based Research, Systematic Reviews and Meta-Research 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) Coronel Zubiate FT. Peer Review Report For: Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194692.r449951) 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/14-1191/v2#referee-response-449951 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Coronel Zubiate F. 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 Dec 2025 | for Version 1 Franz Tito Coronel Zubiate , Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza de Amazonas, Chachapoyas, Peru 0 Views copyright © 2025 Coronel Zubiate F. 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 manuscript presents a bibliometric analysis of research on habits of mind in education, with the stated aim of linking habits of mind to 21st-century skills, environmental sustainability, and particularly SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), with special attention to the Indonesian context. My comments are as follows. I consider points 1–6 necessary to ensure that the article is scientifically sound, while points 7–10 are recommended to improve clarity and impact. 1. Alignment between objectives, SDG 6 focus, and the search strategy. The title, abstract and introduction emphasize a specific focus on SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation), but the reported search strategy only mentions the combinations “habit of mind” AND “education” and “environmental sustainability” AND “environmental education”. No explicit SDG-related terms (e.g. “SDG 6”, “clean water”, “sanitation”, “water management”) are described, and it is not clear how publications related to SDG 6 were identified within the corpus. To avoid a mismatch between aims and methods, the authors should either: (a) explicitly report how SDG 6 was operationalized in the search (including the precise SDG- and water-related keywords or filters used, and how SDG-6-relevant documents were selected and analyzed); or (b) if such a specific SDG 6 search was not in fact implemented, adjust the title, abstract and objectives to present the work as a broader bibliometric analysis on habits of mind, 21st-century skills and sustainability, with SDG 6 discussed more conceptually rather than as the central empirical focus. 2. Insufficient methodological detail for replication. For a bibliometric analysis, reproducibility is crucial. At present, key details are missing. The authors should state: (i) the exact date on which the Scopus search was run; (ii) the full search strings as implemented in Scopus, including fields (e.g. TITLE-ABS-KEY), Boolean operators, truncation, and any subject-area or document-type filters; (iii) the initial number of records retrieved, the number removed as duplicates or irrelevant, and the final number of records included in the analysis; and (iv) whether a manual screening of titles/abstracts was conducted and according to which criteria. In addition, the parameters used in VOSviewer and other tools (e.g. minimum number of occurrences for keywords and authors, counting method, clustering options) should be described clearly. It should also be clarified whether there was a single integrated corpus or whether separate corpora were constructed for habits of mind and sustainability education. Without this information, other researchers cannot replicate or critically appreciate the analysis. 3. Limited quantitative detail in the results. The results section is predominantly narrative and does not provide enough quantitative information for readers to fully understand the patterns described. For example, the “Publication trends” subsection does not report the total number of documents, annual counts, or growth rates, and includes an unclear phrase about “income growth” which seems to refer instead to publication output. The subsection on highly cited papers mentions top articles, but Table 1 is incomplete/truncated and does not list full bibliographic information or citation counts for the top 10 documents. Similarly, the discussion of leading journals, institutions and countries is not supported by tables or explicit numbers. I strongly recommend adding tables summarizing at least: (i) the top journals (number of documents and citations in the corpus); (ii) the top authors (number of documents, citations, and, if applicable, h-index within the corpus); (iii) the top institutions and countries. The values ​​used to construct Figure 1 (annual publication counts) should also be explicitly reported in the text and/or in a table. These additions are necessary to give the analysis more transparency and analytical weight. 4. Figures and network analyzes need to be linked more explicitly to the refined bibliometric analysis. The manuscript includes several network visualizations (author collaboration, keyword co-occurrence, etc.), but the descriptions are quite general and do not provide essential information such as the number of nodes, the number of clusters, the minimum thresholds used, or examples of key nodes in each cluster. Once the bibliometric analysis has been refined and fully specified as suggested in points 1–3, the figures should be updated or confirmed to reflect those parameters, and the captions and text should be expanded to include basic quantitative descriptors (e.g. “The map includes X authors grouped into Y clusters, with cluster 1 centered on…”). This will make the visualizations more interpretable and clearly grounded in the reported methods. 5. Indonesian focus is conceptually emphasized but not fully demonstrated empirically. Throughout the manuscript, Indonesia is presented as a focal context, and several claims are made about its contribution to the literature (e.g. comparisons with other countries). However, there is no dedicated quantitative subsection reporting the number of Indonesian publications within the corpus, the main Indonesian institutions, journals in which Indonesian authors publish, or the patterns of international collaboration involving Indonesia. To substantiate the stated focus, the authors should include a concise sub-section (for example, “Indonesian contribution to the research landscape”) where they present specific data on Indonesian output in the corpus and, where appropriate, compare it with neighboring countries using the same dataset. Any comparative statements (e.g. Indonesia publishing more than Singapore or Thailand) should be supported with explicit numbers. 6. Conclusions about SDG 6 and policy implications should more clearly distinguish between empirical findings and conceptual extrapolation. The discussion and conclusion sections contain rich conceptual reflections on how habits of mind may support sustainability education and SDG 6. However, given the current limitations in the SDG-specific operationalization and the lack of a clearly reported SDG-6-focused sub-analysis, some of the stronger claims about SDG 6 appear more aspirational than data-driven. It would strengthen the manuscript if the authors explicitly distinguished which statements are directly supported by the bibliometric evidence (e.g. growth in habits-of-mind research, centrality of certain themes or authors) and which are broader implications or recommendations based on the literature and theoretical reasoning. Where possible, empirical evidence on SDG-6-related publications from the corpus should be presented; where this is not feasible, the language about SDG 6 should be moderated. 7. Article type and framing as a bibliometric review. Although the work is currently labeled as a research article, its design and objectives are more aligned with a bibliometric review that maps a field rather than testing a specific hypothesis through primary data collection. It may be helpful for readers if the authors explicitly describe the work as a bibliometric review or mapping study in the abstract and introduction, and confirm that this classification is consistent with the journal's guidelines. This clarification does not change the core results but improves the conceptual framing and reader expectations. 8. Language, structure, and consistency of terminology. The manuscript would benefit from careful English language editing by a fluent or native speaker. There are multiple instances of awkward phrasing, tense inconsistency, and minor errors (e.g. shifting between “habit of mind” and “habits of mind”, the phrase “income growth” instead of “growth in publication output”, stray commas). Some ideas about the importance of critical thinking, creativity and perseverance are repeated many times with similar wording and could be streamlined to improve readability. Consistent use of established terms such as “inquiry-based learning”, “problem-based learning” and “experiential learning” is also recommended. 9. Clarifying the link between influential authors/institutions and the bibliometric results. In the discussion, the manuscript highlights influential authors (e.g. Costa and Kallick) and institutions (e.g. Harvard University, Universitas Sebelas Maret), but it is not always clear whether their prominence is derived directly from the bibliometric analysis or from general knowledge of the field. Where such names are presented as “leading” or “central”, it would be useful to briefly indicate how this is reflected in the data (e.g. number of documents in the corpus, citation counts, centrality in collaboration networks). Conversely, background contextual information that is not grounded in the corpus (such as detailed institutional funding policies) could be streamlined or clearly marked as context rather than a result of the analysis. 10. References and recent literature. The manuscript cites a wide range of sources, including recent work up to 2024–2025, which is positive. It is important that all references are complete, accurately formatted, and retrievable, especially for very recent or less widely known publications. A careful check of the reference list against the in-text citations will help avoid missing or inconsistent references. In summary, the manuscript addresses a relevant and underexplored intersection between habits of mind, 21st-century skills and sustainability, and the open data provided are a strong foundation. By clarifying and strengthening the bibliometric methods, reporting more detailed quantitative results, making the empirical basis for the SDG 6 and Indonesian focus more explicit, and refining the writing and figures, the authors can substantially enhance the scientific robustness and usefulness of this contribution. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Dentistry, Orthodontics, Oral Epidemiology, Public Health, Evidence-Based Research, Systematic Reviews and Meta-Research 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 13 Jan 2026 Ella Nada, Department of Natural Science Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for the detailed, methodologically informed, and constructive evaluation of our manuscript. We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s careful attention to the alignment between objectives, search strategy, bibliometric rigor, quantitative reporting, and conceptual framing, as well as the recognition of the potential contribution of this study. In response, we have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the scientific soundness, transparency, and clarity of the manuscript. Below we summarize how the main issues raised have been addressed. First, regarding the alignment between the study objectives, the focus on SDG 6, and the search strategy, we acknowledge that the original manuscript did not sufficiently explain how SDG 6–related literature was operationalized within the bibliometric corpus. To resolve this issue, we have revised the methodology and framing in two complementary ways. We now explicitly describe how SDG 6 was approached analytically, clarifying that the bibliometric search primarily captured literature on habits of mind, education, and sustainability, while SDG 6–related publications were identified through keyword co-occurrence, thematic clustering, and post-retrieval screening of sustainability- and water-related terms within the corpus. At the same time, we have moderated the language in the title, abstract, and objectives to avoid overstating SDG 6 as a narrowly operationalized empirical filter, instead presenting it as a focused sustainability domain examined within the broader habits-of-mind and education literature. This revision ensures conceptual and methodological consistency between aims and methods. Second, we fully agree that reproducibility is essential in bibliometric research. The Methodology section has therefore been comprehensively revised to include all information necessary for replication. We now report the exact date on which the Scopus search was conducted, the complete search strings as implemented in Scopus (including database fields, Boolean operators, truncation, and applied filters), and the full screening process. This includes the initial number of records retrieved, the number of duplicates removed, exclusions based on relevance, and the final number of documents included in the analysis. We also clarify that a manual screening of titles and abstracts was conducted and specify the criteria used. In addition, the parameters applied in VOSviewer are now fully described, including software version, counting method, minimum thresholds, and clustering settings. The revised manuscript also clarifies whether analyses were conducted on a single integrated corpus or on analytically distinct subsets, thereby substantially improving transparency and reproducibility. Third, in response to concerns about limited quantitative detail in the Results section, we have expanded this section considerably. The revised Results now explicitly report the total number of documents analyzed, annual publication counts, and overall growth trends, correcting ambiguous wording such as the earlier reference to “income growth.” Tables have been added summarizing the top journals, authors, institutions, and countries, including document counts and citation indicators. The table of highly cited papers has been completed and corrected to include full bibliographic information and citation counts. The numerical values underlying Figure 1 are now reported directly in the text and/or tables, allowing readers to clearly assess publication trends. Fourth, we have strengthened the integration between figures, network visualizations, and the refined bibliometric analysis. All figures are now explicitly referenced and interpreted in the Results section. Descriptions of network maps have been expanded to include basic quantitative descriptors, such as the number of nodes, the number of clusters, threshold criteria, and illustrative examples of central nodes within each cluster. Figure captions have been revised accordingly. These changes make the visualizations more interpretable and clearly grounded in the reported methods and data. Fifth, we recognize the reviewer’s observation that the Indonesian focus was conceptually emphasized but insufficiently demonstrated empirically. To address this, we have added a dedicated subsection presenting the Indonesian contribution to the research landscape. This subsection reports the number of Indonesian publications in the corpus, leading Indonesian institutions, publication venues, and patterns of international collaboration. Where comparative statements are made (e.g., comparisons with neighboring countries), these are now supported by explicit quantitative data derived from the same dataset. This revision substantiates the Indonesian focus with concrete evidence rather than narrative emphasis alone. Sixth, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion to clearly distinguish between findings directly supported by bibliometric evidence and broader conceptual extrapolations or policy-oriented implications. Statements grounded in empirical results such as publication growth, dominant themes, and collaboration patterns are now explicitly linked to quantitative indicators. Where claims relate to SDG 6 more conceptually, the language has been moderated and framed as theoretical interpretation or implication rather than direct empirical inference. This distinction improves analytical rigor and prevents overextension of the results. Seventh, in line with the reviewer’s suggestion, we have clarified the article type and framing. The manuscript now explicitly describes the study as a bibliometric review and mapping study in both the abstract and the introduction, aligning reader expectations with the study design and confirming consistency with the journal’s scope. Eighth, the manuscript has undergone careful language revision to improve clarity, consistency, and readability. Terminology has been standardized (e.g., consistent use of “habits of mind”), repetitive passages have been streamlined, and errors related to phrasing, tense, and word choice have been corrected. Key pedagogical terms such as inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, and experiential learning are now used consistently. Ninth, we have clarified the presentation of influential authors and institutions. Where authors or institutions are described as leading or central, we now indicate how this prominence is reflected in the bibliometric data (e.g., publication counts, citation metrics, or network centrality). Contextual background information not directly derived from the corpus has been reduced or clearly identified as contextual rather than empirical. Finally, the reference list has been carefully checked to ensure completeness, accuracy, and consistency with in-text citations, particularly for recent publications. Minor formatting issues have been corrected. In summary, we are grateful to Reviewer 2 for highlighting critical issues that have significantly strengthened the manuscript. Through clearer operationalization of SDG 6, improved methodological transparency, expanded quantitative reporting, a more explicit Indonesian analysis, and refined framing and language, the revised manuscript offers a more robust, replicable, and analytically grounded bibliometric contribution to research on habits of mind, education, sustainability, and SDG 6. View more View less Competing Interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. reply Respond Report a concern Coronel Zubiate FT. Peer Review Report For: Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188172.r431413) 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/14-1191/v1#referee-response-431413 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Figueiredo 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. 02 Dec 2025 | for Version 1 Natália Figueiredo , University of Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal 0 Views copyright © 2025 Figueiredo 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 well. Firstly, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review the article "Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st-Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis Focusing on SDG 6 in Educational Research." The article examines the relationship between habits of mind, the development of 21st-century skills, and environmental sustainability, with a particular focus on SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation). It is an interdisciplinary topic aligned with global agendas. It employs a bibliometric approach (Scopus + VOSviewer) to map the field, identify themes, authors, and gaps—with a special focus on the case of Indonesia. The potential contribution lies in consolidating the state of the art and highlighting regional gaps (Indonesia). However, the text suffers from organizational problems, crucial methodological omissions, inaccuracies, and a lack of transparency in several points that compromise the reproducibility and credibility of the findings. Specifically, a review and reflection on the aspects highlighted would strengthen the analysis and the overall impact of the paper. Title: The title is clear and concise and fits the theme analyzed. Abstract The abstract should be a concise summary of the paper, presenting fundamental information that captures the reader's attention. This abstract lacks information, particularly regarding the methodology used. The authors do not mention that this paper is a systematic literature review. Furthermore, the authors do not specify how they analyzed the articles, the software they used, or the number of articles they analyzed. This needs to be clarified. The authors state that mental habits are important, but they do not present specific findings (e.g., main clusters, most cited authors). Instead, the authors could be more direct and present the originality of the study. Finally, the authors refer to "This research examines the effects of habits of mind on the development of modern skills and environmental health, especially their part in making progress toward SDG 6 in educational research." However, the bibliometric study does not directly analyze effects but rather maps the existing literature. This expression should be corrected. Keywords Although the keywords presented are well defined. Introduction: The introduction presents problems of coherence and organization, revealing repeated passages and an unclear structure. A thorough reorganization is recommended, explicitly distinguishing between the global context, gaps in the literature, study objectives, and expected contributions. Some statements lack bibliographic support. For example, when the authors state “Even so, there is limited research available on how habits of mind influence students’ mental abilities that benefit the environment,” it is not indicated who supports this statement nor to which studies it refers. The same occurs with the phrase “While certain developed countries have adopted habits of mind…”, where it is not specified which developed countries are considered or based on what evidence. The authors mention that “Missing from the research is a proper study of this context using bibliometrics, which is a major gap,” but do not present any reference to support this gap. To adequately justify the relevance and contribution of the article, it would be essential to mention beforehand which systematic reviews or bibliometric studies have already been conducted in the area, clearly explaining the focus of each and demonstrating how the present work differs and adds value. Without this foundation, the gap presented is not properly supported by the literature. Furthermore, upon reading the introduction, the study's objective appears to be more specific than what is indicated in the abstract—notably regarding the educational dimension, which is not mentioned in the summary. It would be beneficial to present an explicit research question that guides and clarifies the study's purpose. Regarding the methodology, several significant doubts persist. The authors make claims such as: “limited research exists on…”; “few studies have examined…”; “missing from the research is… bibliometric studies”, but they do not cite authors who confirm this. This seriously weakens credibility. The authors state: “Through the analysis of publication records, this study will highlight important works and advances that have guided research in this area.” However, it is not indicated what type of analysis was performed (e.g., traditional bibliometric analysis, co-citation analysis, thematic networks), how many articles were included, which database was used, what time period was considered, or what specific software or techniques were employed. Without this information, the methodology remains vague and insufficiently described. Finally, the last paragraph of the introduction should present the article's structure, indicating how the text is organized and what sections follow. Literature Review The literature review introduces important concepts, such as habits of mind, their relationship with 21st-century skills, and their connection to sustainability. However, this presentation is essentially descriptive and lacks critical analysis. The concepts appear in isolation, without explaining how they relate to each other—namely, how habits of mind contribute to the development of 21st-century skills, how these skills promote sustainable behaviors, the role of clean water and sanitation education, and finally, how all these elements relate to SDG 6 in the educational context. Without this integration, the reader lacks a solid theoretical foundation. As in the introduction, this section also contains statements not supported by bibliographic references. For example, the phrase "Researchers today..." is vague and does not identify the authors or studies on which it is based, which should be corrected. Furthermore, considering that the study focuses on Indonesia, it is essential to strengthen the theoretical connection with the country. Therefore, it is recommended to include official data—such as reports from UNESCO or UNICEF—comparative regional studies, a brief contextualization of the Indonesian education system, and the national goals associated with SDG 6. This information is fundamental to justifying the pertinence and relevance of the study in the chosen context. Methodology The combined use of the selected tools is common in bibliometric studies and constitutes a robust set for citation analysis, network mapping, and identification of co-occurrences. However, while the authors justify the adoption of bibliometric analysis, they should equally justify the need and relevance of conducting a Systematic Literature Review (SLR), since this constitutes another central component of the study. Replicability is one of the essential principles of an SLR, but this is not possible with the information currently presented due to several methodological gaps. To ensure transparency and allow for future validation, the authors must include: the complete query used (including Boolean operators, specific fields such as TITLE-ABS-KEY, combined terms, and applied filters); the exact date the search was conducted; the initial number of records retrieved; the number of documents removed as duplicates; the number excluded due to irrelevance; and, finally, the total number of articles included in the analysis. For greater clarity, it is recommended to present a PRISMA flow diagram, which visually summarizes the process of identifying, screening, and including studies. It is equally important to justify the adopted time period (2010–2015). Authors should clarify why the research begins in 2010 and what theoretical or empirical basis supports this decision. Although the choice of the Scopus database is defended in the text, this justification is not accompanied by bibliographic references, which should be corrected. Finally, authors must detail the parameters used in VOSviewer, including the software version, the type of count (full or fractional), the minimum thresholds for including terms or authors, and any other relevant settings. This information is essential to ensure the reproducibility and rigor of the study. Results Figure 1 should be presented with its explanation in the text and referenced correctly in the body of the manuscript. Furthermore, the authors should correct how they cite specific authors, specifically in the passages: “In addition, R.W. Roeser’s…”, “Works like those from C. Halse (2010) on supervising doctorates, from M. Tedre (2016) concerning computational thinking and from E.R. Hollins (2011).” and “Researchers Lammi, M. Stephan, A.T. and Gal, I…”. These references lack rigor and should be revised to adhere to proper citation standards. All tables and figures should be identified and discussed in the body of the text. In the case of Figure 2, neither its mention nor its explanation is provided, and its relevance remains unclear. Additionally, since the total number of articles analyzed is not indicated, it becomes impossible to understand the relative importance of the distribution of publications among different journals. The authors state that “Researchers in sustainability education also form a strongly connected global community…”, but they do not specify which researchers they are referring to or how this conclusion was reached. Empirical data and clear explanations must support such a statement. Once again, it seems that Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6 are not mentioned or interpreted in the text. This omission seriously compromises the understanding and analysis of the results presented. In general, the results lack essential data, such as: the total number of articles included in the analysis, the number of authors, institutions, and countries involved, as well as the identification of the countries that most investigate this topic. Without this basic information, the reader cannot adequately assess the size, relevance, and geographical distribution of the research. Finally, the discussion would clearly benefit from a cluster analysis, possibly through bibliographic coupling methodology, which would allow for the rigorous identification of the main themes addressed in the literature. In fact, this should be one of the central purposes of a Systematic Literature Review. Discussion The discussion presents some general trends — such as dominant countries and collaboration networks — but lacks a more in-depth analysis of the coherence or divergence of these results compared to previous studies. There is also a lack of citations that support or engage with the findings presented. The statement "Many studies show that teaching STEM topics with a problem-based approach helps develop important habits of mind" lacks foundation: the authors do not indicate which studies support this conclusion. Similarly, the statement "Although progress has been made, the analysis shows that the ideas from theories are still far from being applied effectively in education at scale and in practical ways in Indonesia" does not directly follow from the bibliometric analysis performed, and therefore needs methodological clarification or additional empirical support. Furthermore, there is a lack of articulation between the discussion and the quantitative results obtained. No concrete data are presented — such as annual evolution of production, most cited articles, or relevant bibliometric metrics — that would support the statements made. For example, stating that "These networks show a lot of collaboration between institutions within Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, and the United States…" is impossible to verify based on the results provided. The same criticism applies to the phrase "We have seen an increase in Indonesian institutions partnering with major global excellence centers in recent days," which is not supported by the evidence presented in the study. In addition, the references to the authors "Costa and Kallick" are incorrectly formatted and should be revised according to citation standards. The link to SDG 6 remains underdeveloped. It would be pertinent for the authors to illustrate how habits of mind can be applied in concrete educational initiatives related to sustainable water and sanitation management, reinforcing the practical relevance of the research. The topic "Gaps in the literature" would be better placed in the introduction, where the identification of the scientific gap that the study intends to fill naturally fits. Ultimately, the implications presented appear to be primarily directed towards policymakers. It would also be important to consider the role of higher education institutions, professors, trainers, and other educational agents, who also make fundamental contributions to the advancement of this topic. Conclusions The conclusion presents general implications, but lacks a truly objective synthesis and an explicit link to the quantitative findings of the study, including the quantification of the main results. Furthermore, methodological limitations are not discussed. The authors do not address any limitations of the database used, nor of the bibliometric analysis techniques themselves, although these exist and should be acknowledged. There is also redundancy between the discussion and the conclusion: both present implications, but these should be concentrated in a single point, preferably in the discussion section, leaving the conclusion focused on synthesizing the results and the overall contribution of the study. The same problem arises in relation to suggestions for future research, which are presented in separate sections and remain insufficiently substantiated. These proposals should be integrated and articulated coherently, clearly demonstrating how they follow from the results obtained. References The bibliography is relevant and well presented. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? No If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? No Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? No Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? No Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise My research area is based on management and marketing, using systematic literature review (SLR) and bibliometric analysis. Therefore, I felt comfortable evaluating this article. 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 13 Jan 2026 Ella Nada, Department of Natural Science Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, rigorous, and highly constructive evaluation of our manuscript. The reviewer’s expertise in systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis has been invaluable in identifying critical weaknesses related to structure, methodological transparency, reproducibility, and analytical depth. We fully acknowledge these concerns and have undertaken a major revision of the manuscript. Below we summarize how each issue has been addressed. The manuscript has been substantially reorganized to improve coherence and logical flow. The Introduction has been rewritten to clearly distinguish between the global context, theoretical background, identified research gaps, research objectives, and expected contributions. Redundant passages have been removed, and unsupported general statements have either been revised with appropriate citations or deleted. The educational focus of the study, which was previously implicit, is now made explicit and aligned consistently across the abstract, introduction, and discussion. The Abstract has been completely rewritten. It now explicitly identifies the study as a Systematic Literature Review combined with bibliometric analysis , specifies the database used (Scopus), the period of analysis (2010–2025), the number of articles analyzed, the analytical techniques employed (co-authorship, co-citation, and keyword co-occurrence analysis), and the software used (VOSviewer). Vague and causal language such as “examining effects” has been replaced with mapping-oriented terminology consistent with bibliometric methodology. Concrete findings—such as dominant thematic clusters, leading contributors, and underexplored links between habits of mind, sustainability education, and SDG 6 are now clearly stated, together with the originality of the study. The Introduction has been strengthened by explicitly grounding the research gap in existing systematic reviews and bibliometric studies. We now cite prior reviews to demonstrate that, although habits of mind, 21st-century skills, and sustainability education have been studied separately, integrated bibliometric analyses particularly those linking these constructs to SDG 6 and the Indonesian context remain scarce. Clear research questions have been added to guide the study, and the final paragraph of the Introduction now outlines the structure of the article. The Literature Review has been revised from a descriptive presentation into an integrated theoretical framework. The revised section explicitly explains how habits of mind function as cognitive dispositional foundations for 21st-century skills, how these skills contribute to sustainable behaviors, and why SDG 6 requires competencies such as systems thinking, ethical reasoning, and environmental literacy. The Indonesian context has been strengthened through the inclusion of international reports and contextual data related to education, water, and sanitation, thereby justifying the relevance of focusing on Indonesia. The Methodology section has undergone the most extensive revision to ensure full transparency and replicability. The study design is now clearly justified as a combination of SLR and bibliometric analysis, supported by methodological references. The complete search strategy is reported in detail, including Boolean queries, database fields, applied filters, and the exact date of the search. The screening process is fully documented, reporting the initial number of records retrieved, duplicates removed, exclusions at each stage, and the final number of documents included. A PRISMA flow diagram has been added to visually summarize this process. The rationale for selecting the 2010–2025 time frame is now explicitly justified based on the evolution of 21st-century skills discourse and the global sustainability agenda. The choice of Scopus is supported with bibliographic references, and all VOSviewer parameters software version, counting method, thresholds, and network settings are now reported. The Results section has been strengthened by systematically referencing and interpreting all tables and figures in the main text. Descriptive statistics have been added, including the total number of publications, authors, institutions, and countries involved, as well as the most productive and influential contributors. Author names and citations have been corrected to meet academic standards. Claims regarding collaboration networks and research communities are now supported by explicit network indicators derived from the bibliometric analysis. In response to the reviewer’s suggestion, cluster analysis has been incorporated using keyword co-occurrence and bibliographic coupling to identify dominant and emerging research themes. The Discussion section has been restructured to ensure a clear and explicit linkage between quantitative results and interpretative arguments. All major claims are now grounded in bibliometric evidence and discussed in relation to prior studies. Unsupported generalizations have been removed. The connection to SDG 6 has been strengthened by discussing how habits of mind can be operationalized in educational initiatives related to water and sanitation management. The identification of research gaps has been relocated to the Introduction, where it logically belongs. Implications have been expanded beyond policymakers to include higher education institutions, educators, and teacher training programs. The Conclusion has been revised to provide a concise synthesis of the main quantitative findings and the overall contribution of the study. Redundancies with the Discussion have been eliminated. A dedicated subsection now acknowledges methodological limitations related to database coverage and bibliometric techniques. Suggestions for future research have been integrated coherently and explicitly derived from the results. Minor formatting inconsistencies in references have been corrected, while the overall bibliography has been retained due to its relevance and adequacy. We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s detailed critique. The manuscript has been fundamentally improved in terms of structure, methodological rigor, transparency, and analytical depth. We believe the revised version now meets the standards required for a systematic literature review and bibliometric study and offers a clearer and more credible contribution to educational research, sustainability studies, and SDG 6. View more View less Competing Interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. reply Respond Report a concern Figueiredo N. Peer Review Report For: Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis with a Focus on SDG 6 in Educational Research [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :1191 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188172.r431414) 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/14-1191/v1#referee-response-431414 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 = "Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1191/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1191/v1&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1191/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Nada EI 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/14-1191/v1/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/14-1191", templates : { twitter : "Habits of Mind as a Catalyst for 21st Century Skills and Environmental.... Nada EI et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1191/v1" } }; 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/170682/188172") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "188172"); $(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 = { "462479": 0, "462478": 0, "462487": 0, "462486": 0, "462485": 0, "462484": 0, "462483": 4, "462482": 0, "462481": 0, "462480": 0, "472991": 0, "449950": 0, "472990": 0, "449951": 5, "472989": 0, "472988": 0, "472987": 0, "472986": 0, "468391": 0, "474279": 0, "468390": 0, "468389": 0, "468388": 0, "468387": 0, "472995": 0, "472994": 0, "472993": 0, "472992": 0, "474286": 0, "474285": 0, "468396": 0, "474284": 0, "468395": 0, "474283": 0, "468394": 0, "474282": 0, "468393": 0, "474281": 0, "468392": 0, "474280": 0, "429366": 0, "431414": 16, "429367": 0, "431415": 0, "429364": 0, "431413": 11, "429365": 0, "429363": 0, "453950": 0, "431422": 0, "453951": 0, "429372": 0, "431420": 0, "431421": 0, "429370": 0, "431418": 0, "429371": 0, "431419": 0, "429368": 0, "431416": 0, "429369": 0, "431417": 0, "453958": 0, "453959": 0, "466886": 0, "453956": 0, "453957": 0, "453954": 0, "453955": 0, "453952": 0, "453953": 0, "465271": 0, "465270": 0, "465269": 0, "465268": 0, "465267": 0, "465266": 0, "465275": 0, "465274": 0, "465273": 0, "465272": 0, }; $(".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 = "583986cd-acf3-4c0b-9626-7c4409ea8051"; 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(",","/")); } }); });