Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

A meteorologically congruent qualitative research paper is found. It is necessary to address the following comments in order to improve it:

Deepen the discussion, so that it is clear how the findings are understood by each analytical category in light of the theory consulted.

I recommend including a section with the conclusions for each category, as this does not appear in the current version.

 

Author Response

Please see the two attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

 

1. The authors conducted their study on a group of 30 women. How they are statistically confident about their selection of sample size. Need to be clear on it.

2. How they have selected their studied variables, needs to clarify it.

3. I am not clear about the research question, especially on which basis they have selected these questions. Also, what is  the significance of this study compared to existing studies, please clarify it.

4. In section 3.1 I see that different questions have different numbers of participants. Is it the count of participants or the tag number of participants? Need to explain it.

5. In section 3, the authors have made many categories, based on which criteria they have done these categories? Please clarify it.

6. I don’t see any mentionable statistical analysis or model used in this study. Please try to include statistical analysis or models to explain violence.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you all authors for clearly explaining all issues. Though you have not included any statistical model, I am satisfied with your explanation.