Title: Knowledge, perceptions, beliefs, and opinions of the employees about GBV: a national
online study in South Africa
Version: 4 Date: 04 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
he authors should be commended for the interesting topic of Gender-based Violence which is
currently a major challenge in South Africa. The paper has good contributions, however, I have
some suggestions to improve it
1. Abstract: Methods should include the sampling technique adopted. The design and
methodology it seems this was a mixed-method study where you adopted both qualitative and
quantitative methods. This should be clearly described under methodology and the rationale
for using both methods. At the moment is a bit confusing as it is only outlined under analysis.
Keywords: The keywords should only include major concepts’ that describe the study not the
methods: It should include words such as: Employee Knowledge, Perceptions, beliefs, Gender-
based Violence (Remove the concepts that describe the methods such as Cronbach's alpha and
Questionnaire
2. Introduction: The first sentence should introduce the reader on what is GBV and then follow
with a sentence that shows the severity of the problem and its impact. Though the authors have
indicated the importance of GBV to be addressed in all sectors, the introduction still lack the
rationale on what prompts the authors to conduct this study amongst the employees. What does
the literature say about GBV at the workplace, and what is it impact on the well-being, families,
productivity, mental health etc?. Though SA statistics of GBV were outlined , it does not align to
the title , the authors’ should search for literature indicating GBV at work place not general one.
3. Methods: Add the study setting, describing where the study was conducted (the context) ,
and how many provinces. Also indicating the rationale for choosing SA e.g the rate of GBV
at the workplace nationally. See the comment under the abstract kindly indicate that you used
both qualitative and quantitative. Sampling should be described before data collection. The
population should be clearly described. Did you include employees from both private and
government if so this should be clearly indicated under the results. The rationale for adopting
content analysis should be clearly indicated.
4. Results: Somewhere the results are now reporting on violence against children, is this paper
not reporting GBV at workplace? : the golden thread of research all the sections must be aligned
from the title to the conclusion.
5.
Discussion: Even though the current study from South Africa was an online survey and the same
invitations were sent to the employees from all sectors, public sector employees responded the
least (1.2%), and private sector employees responded the highest (59.2%). Statistically does this
make 100% (out of the total sample size how many were public and how many were private
in percentage). The discussion is poorly written. The authors should develop the implications
of the results of this study; implications in terms of practice, policies, regulations and gender
inequality. Legal, education and public health sectors were separated in the results. Employees
under ‘Legal’ heading work in public judiciary systems such as judge, private law practitioners
such as advocates. Also, private security employees were included here. Education consists
of employees from both public and private sectors, as both sectors are highly prevalent in
South Africa. This is only describing different sectors what are the perceptions in terms of the
above description and what are the differences, what does this now mean., what can be done
(recommandations)