1)	ORIGINALITY. While this research is building on previous self-efficacy research it provides clarity, through a large sample, into sub-scale differences in self-efficacy around gender that could be useful in guiding workshop/intervention. The author(s) could be more specific about the contribution to literature and application in Discussion section as noted in document comments 
2)	RESEARCH. The instruments and data analysis all seem to be appropriate for the study and clearly connected through the study’s design. The contributions to literature could be more thorough as noted in document comments.
3)	THEORY. Clear contribution to social learning theory as defined in submission. Consistent strength of the paper.
4)	PRACTICE. There is clear potential for application of this study to intervention and/or instruction but the paper could define and discuss applications more thoroughly. Acknowledging and bringing more understanding to gender differences around self-efficacy could powerfully transform counseling and educational services.
5)	LITERATURE. Literature review is clear and focused, another consistent strength of paper.
6)	WRITING. The phrasing and grammar at times in the paper are unclear at times, as noted in the document comments.
7)	OTHER INTERAMERICAN AUTHORS CITED. N/A
