Title: “Counteract the gaslighting” – A thematic analysis of open-ended responses about what
women survivors of intimate partner sexual violence need from service providers.
Version: 1 Date: 07 Nov 2023
Reviewer:  Tony McGinn
Reviewer's report:
Abstract
“Three themes captured how to address this invisibility …”. I would suggest you are over-
reaching here, might be better to say “three themes suggest potential ways forward” or
similar wording. I believe it is important to remember that study participants try and put their
experiences and perspectives into words, then researchers apply their own interpretation of that
to arrive at “findings”. It’s inductive. Exploratory.
Also, related to above, consider this statement “In the third theme, ‘counteract the gaslighting’,
women needed providers to actively counteract the cultural silencing of IPSV by naming the
violence and providing education to help women identify IPSV.” I would suggest there is too
much of the researchers’ discussion here. We need your results section to be as objective as
possible. Your recommendations may be highly valid but you are mixing them into your results
when you choose this wording.
Abstract conclusion
This is a little too journalistic. Would much rather see implications for policy, practice and
research that correspond exactly to an objective description of themes in the findings.
“specific and tailored” these terms are arguably contradictory
Method Section
Might just be me, but I didn’t understand this – “focusing on the semantic (rather than implicit
or latent) meaning of data”
You state – “we assumed that the data and findings reflect some version of reality or ‘truth’
whilst recognising that this reality is socially-mediated and the findings are shaped by both the
researchers and the research context” – this is underlines the point I make above – in the event of
writing up your study report I think you forgot this understanding. On occasion, in your findings
and discussion, I get the impression that you think you have definite answers following the
data analysis you have completed, but if you pause to consider the small amount of data you
have, from typed survey responses, you might be prompted to adjust how it is presented. It is an
important contribution, but it is definitely exploratory research.
This worries me a little – “5. Finally, the refined and finalised themes were weaved together to
tell a coherent ‘story’ that reflected the content of the data.” Forcing a story upon this type of
data might distort the useful information in the data.
Good to see consideration of research reflexivity.
Findings
“The counsellor I saw told me that it was my duty to satisfy and submit to my husband and
were focused on teaching me how to be more responsive and give him sex happily when he
wanted it (P694).”
This is a very impactful finding. How many of the 37 offered similar? Some journals would
want you to put numbers beside each theme - how many respondents experienced each. I dislike
this idea but it does force you to think hard – is this one of most prevalent themes, or is it just
so impactful that I am determined to put it in? I would encourage objectivity – without seeing
the data I can’t definitively say you are not being objective enough, but having done this type
of research I suspect more objectivity is needed in your data analysis. Ideally you would have
someone independent go through the same analysis process and then compare findings, and use
that as a “mechanism of qualitative rigour”. Anyway – even if it was just 2 or 3 respondents
– it should be discussed – what sub-culture in Australia are we referring to here – are we to
accept that this is the case across … what? The whole nation? I would unpick this as far as
possible given the limited data, and demographics you have, and point out the limitations you
are working with.
“women wanted providers to educate them about what intimate partner sexual violence looks
like.” – but there are no quotes to back this up – I would ask you to look hard at this section
and report finding more objectively – keep your own ideas about what needs to change for the
Discussion section
General Comments
This is a well written submission. I believe it needs work, as described, and I believe it should
be published.