Resisting to Exist and the Subtle Invisible Protest: Six Solution Focused Tactics about Challenging Behaviour
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPlease see attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Please see comments in attached file.
Author Response
Hello and thank you for your comprehensive review. Please see the attached document.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
General comments: The review is complete and cover the topic pointing its relevance and the gap in knowledge identified. The article is scientifically sound, relevant, and very useful for practice. The manuscript is clear and presented in a well-structured manner. The cited references are appropriate and include 38% of recent publications (within the last 5 years). It is adequate for a review article. The conclusions are consistent with the arguments presented.
Main contributions: The article introduces key differences of SF practice and how 6D-SF model (details, dynamics, dimensions, dispositions, dislocations, descriptions) were design and put in practice. Introduced reflection about some of SF theory and traditional models regard adolescent challenging behaviour. The article examined the concept of ‘resistance’ and how it can be used as a process of collaboration. The SF theory was revisited and attempted to make it useful for professionals having conversations with young people, who, in traditional models, are labelled challenging. The 6D-SF target group: must be young people (adolescents aged 16 to 21) who fit into the non-violent categories of most challenging behaviour models (Self-injurious, Destructive, Disruptive, Passive). Present the 6D-SF model (details, dynamics, dimensions, dispositions, dislocations, descriptions) for contemplating how groups of professionals relate to each other and are triggered by challenging behaviour. The 6D-SF is a pallet of interventions for assessing and analysing clients’ adoption and adaption of SF conversation in their everyday interactions with the young people in their care).
Strengths: It contains very important information for those who work with adolescents, especially in schools because explore the notion of challenging behaviour and resistance and suggest they are frequently encountered behaviours, especially in specialist adolescent services, schools and emergency care. Introduce the idea of Solution Focused (SF) practice, explore 6D application and offer 6 practical tactics for teams working with challenging behaviour. Make use of brief case studies, figures, supervision group quotes and a few simple tweaks so that practitioners, policymakers, and researchers can join us in our rethinking of what it means to deal with resistant adolescents, their families and care giving environments.
Specific comments:
The article will be read internationally, so authors should clarify these phrases and acronyms.
§77 say boo-to-a-goose
§82 specifically CAMHS and learning disability
§85 ADHD
§108 The NHS explains
§ 108-9. This concept must be put in place right from the start! “The NHS explains challenging behaviour for both children and adults as behaviour that “puts them or those around them (such as their carer) at risk or leads to a poorer quality of life.”
§279. Figure 4 must be presented in §172. It’ll makes the explanation of 6D explanation clearer.
In the conclusion, authors could make suggestions on how to validate the model.
Author Response
Thank you for the review, the helpful comments, and for reminding us of an international readership. We have made changes to all of your points. Please see our response below:
§77 say boo-to-a-goose - we changed this expression, see §81
§82 specifically CAMHS and learning disability - explained in the text §86-88
§85 ADHD - explained in the text §90-91
§108 The NHS explains - explained §49
§ 108-9. This concept must be put in place right from the start! “The NHS explains challenging behaviour for both children and adults as behaviour that “puts them or those around them (such as their carer) at risk or leads to a poorer quality of life.” - moved to the beginning §49-52
§279. Figure 4 must be presented in §172. It’ll makes the explanation of 6D explanation clearer. - order changed, some texts and the figures updated accordingly, see new 3.2., 3.3. and 3.4
In the conclusion, authors could make suggestions on how to validate the model. - an additional point added §539-543
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI maintain that the manuscript contains quite a few incomplete sentences, which negatively impacts readability. It is also important to understand that, without clear explanations of concepts, findings, etc., the work that a researcher has done is not useful to their audiences. Thus, the attention given to grammar issues in the manuscript was meant constructively, not maliciously, as it seems to have been interpreted.
Most content issues, however, have been reasonably resolved.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguagePlease see previous comment.
Author Response
hello and thank you for the constrcutive comments. we have responded to your sugegstions and also made a number of changes. please see attached our response and the updated article.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
