Vote: Publish pending minor changes
[For votes to count, referees must reasonably explain why they voted as they did. Thus, please explain your vote. If you voted to publish pending minor changes, specify each change, why it is needed, and, possibly, how it should/could be done.]
In literature review, authors should look to expand on sources that directly speak to the very topic they are investigating. They do a good job citing to relatable sources on the matter but what about those studies that are directly related to their study, I would behoove the authors to underscore those more as they show a direct correlation to the current study, no? Especially if those sources can give more credence to your fatherhood frameworks, particularly as they relate to Black men and since they may be more culturally and theoretically relevant to your study as well. More important, this may help to strengthen the theoretical underpinnings of the study.
Something to bear in mind for future studies (or even the current): You may want to caution limiting your reference point on masculinity and fatherhood to traditional sociology given that African American Studies and Black Male Studies have long cultivated theories and literatures around this very topic from which you can easily pull as well. You don’t want to risk ignoring equally other, culturally relevant literature. These literatures will significantly help to contextualize your narratives.
Also, the insertion of narratives can appear confusing at times with the “A: and Q:” being included. There are some instances when the question is not included with the narrative, and we just see the “A:” This has potential of throwing off readers. Is there a way for the authors to position narratives so that they’re not potentially confusing to readers? Perhaps you can insert introductory lines instead of using the A: and Q:.