+
Methodology section is now verifiable: databases, six explicit search strings, publication window with justified pre-2015 exceptions, and clear inclusion/exclusion criteria are stated.
+
A PRISMA-ScR flow diagram (Appendix D) reports exact counts (60 → 44 → 35 → 24 → 19) with exclusion reasons.
+
Duplicate citations flagged in Round 1 (4/15, 6/12/19, 7/13) are resolved; the bibliography now contains 19 distinct entries.
+
The duplicated Section 3.1.4 block is gone and the framework is restructured into five clean, non-overlapping categories plus a cross-cutting subsection.
+
The worked use case (Section 4) is genuinely operationalized: tasks are mapped to stakes, framework dimensions are cited inline, and survey data (Figs. 3–4) is integrated to support the argument.
+
Limitations (Section 5) move from generic statements to six concrete, named research gaps, each with the relevant citations.
+
The AI-use disclosure (Appendix C) is rewritten to directly address Review 2's objection that AI shortcuts the reading process.
+
Section 3.6 introduces a useful synthesis layer (miscalibration, organizational pressure, bias) that did not previously exist.
+
The survey (n > 100) is integrated as a second empirical pillar, supporting the use case with primary data.
−
Stakeholder table (Table 1) still lists only four actors, omits AI developers and vendors, and the explicit "influence on overtrust/undertrust" framing is only applied to the worker row.
−
Sources are not classified by type (empirical / theoretical / practice-oriented) in the paper itself; the mandatory quota raised by Review 2 is not visibly demonstrated.
−
Critical synthesis remains uneven: a few productive contrasts exist (Hoff & Bashir vs. Glikson & Woolley) but most categories still read as accumulation rather than comparison.
−
Section 3.7 ("Calibration Continuum") makes interpretive claims about "structural proxies" and "institutional signals" without anchoring them to specific cited evidence.
−
The empirical survey is announced as a methodological pillar but its sampling, instrument validation, and consent details are not summarized in the main text.
−
Minor formatting inconsistencies persist (spacing before commas, keyword spacing in the abstract, figure caption alignment).