Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. It is insightful, well-written, and makes an appropriate contribution to the literature on sexism in gaming, focusing on an area of scholarship that has had limited attention. I have some minor comments/suggestions as noted below.

Introduction

The research problem is explained and contextualised clearly, focusing on culture and hegemonic norms. The three research questions are appropriate and justified.

suggestion: line 94 – suggest changing ‘people’ to ‘respondents’ else this runs the risk of over-generalising from a limited study from US and UK populations.

Method

The literature search and inclusion/exclusion criteria are clear, and the process for metasynthesis is explained clearly and in sufficient detail

comment: Table 2 – formatting issue? Not clear where the boundaries for each preliminary theme start and end / what preliminary themes in the existing literature belong to which papers

Results

Clearly set out according to the final themes resulting from the metasynthesis, explaining these themes well with thorough and appropriate examples from the included studies.

comment: Line 475 – unclear sentence: “However, even within this will resist, internal contradictions persist”. I assume this is meant to be “will [to] resist”?

Discussion

The results of the metasynthesis are appropriately discussed in relation to the existing literature, and the contribution of the paper is made clear. The consequences and behaviours associated with sexism in gamer communities and environments remain within the scope of the research questions. The limitations and possibilities for future research are clear and appropriate.

It is clear that unfortunately sexism is still an ongoing issue in this space, and that the hegemony of masculine traits and behaviours remains as a barrier to participation among women.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript presents a well-executed metasynthesis of qualitative research concerning sexism within the video game industry and player communities. By synthesizing 15 qualitative studies using the reciprocal translation technique, the authors provide a deep, subjective understanding of normalized violence, coping strategies, and the internal tensions experienced by female players.

 

Strengths:

• Methodological Rigor: The use of PRISMA guidelines and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for quality assessment ensures a high standard of systematic review
• Theoretical Framework: The application of Glick & Fiske’s Theory of Ambivalent Sexism effectively contextualizes the findings
• Clarity of Findings: The emergence of three primary themes (Normalized Violence, Coping Strategies, and Internal Ambivalence) is clearly supported by the data and summarized in a helpful interpretative model (Figure 2)

 

Suggestions for Improvement:

• Expansion of the "Industry" Perspective: While the title mentions the video game industry, the results focus heavily on player experiences. The authors acknowledge a lack of qualitative information regarding industry perceptions; expanding on how current industry protocols (like those of Blizzard or Microsoft) are perceived by players could further strengthen this section
• Intersectional Nuance: As noted in the limitations, the study would benefit from a more explicit discussion on how intersectionality (race, sexual orientation) might alter the experiences of sexism, as this is a growing area of concern in gamer culture

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congratulations on this article and on such a valuable contribution to the academic field. Research that brings visibility to and enriches the discussion of sexism and gender-based violence in digital environments is always necessary—particularly in relation to video games.

Beginning with the more technical aspects, I would like to highlight the rigor of the methodological framework and the techniques employed. These are clearly defined, and both the structure of the article and its writing are carefully crafted and well developed.

However, the theoretical framework would benefit from further deepening, particularly regarding implicit and explicit sexism in video games. Incorporating scholarship from feminist perspectives would strengthen both the narrative and the theoretical justification. This would help to more robustly substantiate discussions surrounding gender-based violence in online environments, as well as women’s own strategies of empowerment.

It would also be advisable to refine the statistical claims when stating that there is an almost equivalent proportion of female and male gamers. This distribution varies according to age group and is not evenly balanced across all cohorts. Greater precision in this regard would enhance the analytical rigor of the argument.

The article’s positive perspective on women’s coping strategies is especially commendable. Nevertheless, this discourse and narrative could be more firmly grounded in the theoretical framework and supported by feminist scholarship addressing both individual and collective empowerment. Collective dimensions are central to feminist strategies, and this article usefully highlights these networks of support. It would therefore be appropriate to employ terminology more explicitly aligned with this perspective

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf