<p>Review for IJPsychology 5/4/17</p><p> </p><p>Although most authors appreciate receiving the reviewer’s comments, it is especially important to provide the rationale for resubmissions or rejections. You may write your comments and email it to the editor etorresrivera@gmail.com.<br /> <br /> (1) Originality.</p><p>Liking for Action and the Vertical-Horizontal Dimension of Culture in 19 Nations expands on a rich line of inquiry into the relationships between valuing equality or valuing hierarchy and positivity towards actions. The article has potentially profound implications for theoretical, empirical and practical aspects of comparative cultural aspects of citizenship, empowerment throughout the Americas.<br /> <br /> (2) Research</p><p>This study uses multi-level modeling (lme4) to determine the way individualist and collectivist orientations affected attitudes towards action or inaction. [if applicable].  The research methodology fit the research question(s). Well explained logic for decision-making throughout article. The sampling techniques, systematic  data collection, and data analysis are appropriate for the study. The data support the findings. The findings are contextualized in light of previous literature.<br /> <br /> (3) Theory</p><p>This paper is based upon a systematic and reflective examination of one or more literatures of theoretical or conceptual perspectives.<br /> <br /> (4) Practice</p><p>The manuscript provides information that will be useful in the practice of psychology by a targeted audience and/or the interdisciplinary readership of the journal. Implications for supervision practice in clinical, organizational, and educational settings are discussed.</p><p> </p><p>(5) Literature Review </p><p>Author(s) critically review relevant literature and demonstrate understanding of current knowledge related to the topic. Author(s) build on existing literature in formulating ideas for this submission.<br /> <br /> (6) Writing</p><p>This manuscript is exceptionally well written, grammatically correct,  mostly free of spelling errors, cohesive, and logically organized. Its conclusions are stated clearly. The author(s) appropriately reference primary and secondary sources using the APA publication manual.</p><p> </p><p>[p.9:) NB Figure 1 is lacking/missing. Halfway down, 2<sup>nd</sup> oara “predict’ NOT PREDICTED  </p><p>[p. 15) Jenkins &amp; Sainsbury (1969): Fun<span style="text-decoration: underline;">d</span>amental; Marcus &amp; Kitayama (1991): motivation;</p><p>(p. 16) Update Spencer-Rogers et al  ref to show its publication.</p><p><br /> <br /><br /></p><p> </p>