Storytelling as a Method of Supporting Couples in Crisis in the Framework of Religious Community Activities

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The literature review must be more comprehensive and more current. Explaining the types of struggles couples have should be supported by research. Discussing the nature of stories is good. But you need to reference the work authors who use narrative with couples. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English needs improving. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable comments on my article. Below I will address each of your comments:

• The literature review must be more comprehensive and more current.

and

• Explaining the types of struggles couples have should be supported by research.

I agree that the scope and currency of the literature are crucial to establishing the research context. Therefore, I have expanded the review to include the latest publications from recent years and deepened the analysis of existing concepts and research results in this area.

• Discussing the nature of stories is good. But you need to reference the work authors who use narrative with couples. 

The comments were taken into account, and the authors of the works who use the narrative in the case of couples were supplemented.

With respect,

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a fascinating focus on storytelling for addressing marital/couple crises. However, I would make several comments to improve the overall arguments. First, the paper is very general and then culminates in a specific application. The issue is that more theory is needed in terms of a narrative view of marriage in terms of mutual meaning-making. That is, narratives are both the source of crises as well as their solution. I would recommend the authors review literature and research associated with Narrative Family and Couple Therapy, especially Maps of Narrative Practice by Michael White. Second, crises should be defined according to the narrative context - what makes something a problem saturated couple story? Third, I would review incorporate literature on the narrative practices associated with pastoral counseling as this seems to be the main focus for the paper. That is, the authors are arguing for pastors, as representatives of religious communities, to provide storytelling as a resource for addressing crises. Fourth, based on these components, the application is grounded in a narrative therapy/pastoral counseling framework.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your insightful comment regarding the need to ground the article more strongly in narrative theory, especially in the context of mutual meaning-making in marital relationships.

1. First, the paper is very general and then culminates in a specific application. The issue is that more theory is needed in terms of a narrative view of marriage in terms of mutual meaning-making. That is, narratives are both the source of crises as well as their solution. I would recommend the authors review literature and research associated with Narrative Family and Couple Therapy, especially Maps of Narrative Practice by Michael White. 

I agree that narratives – both as structures that give meaning and as potential sources of tension – are a key aspect of couples’ relationships that deserve a deeper theoretical approach.

In the original version of the article, I focused mainly on the possibility of using stotelling, hence the theoretical references – especially to the literature related to narrative therapy – were treated more in a framework. My intention was to avoid profiling the work too strongly towards a specific therapeutic approach, in order to maintain openness to interpretation. Nevertheless, I fully appreciate the value of Michael White’s thought and his concept of “Maps of Narrative Practice” and see their potential in deepening the analysis, especially in the context of the mutual construction of meanings by partners.

Therefore, in the revised version of the article, I have introduced additions to the theoretical part, referring to the key assumptions of narrative therapy.

2. Second, crises should be defined according to the narrative context - what makes something a problem saturated couple story? 

I introduced a definition of crisis according to the narrative context.

3. Third, I would review incorporate literature on the narrative practices associated with pastoral counseling as this seems to be the main focus for the paper. That is, the authors are arguing for pastors, as representatives of religious communities, to provide storytelling as a resource for addressing crises.

and

4. Fourth, based on these components, the application is grounded in a narrative therapy/pastoral counseling framework.

I included literature on narrative practices related to pastoral counseling but did not devote much attention to this issue because it is beyond the scope of this article.

With regards

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The biggest concern with the paper is that it does not clearly differentiate between issues that a marriage/long term committed relationship experiences and crises in a relationship. Additionally, a significant amount of time is spent exploring elements of story-telling that are not immediately relevant to the practice of utilizing these strategies. Finally, the citations are not from current literature and there is a wealth of story-telling literature that is unexplored, particularly from Narrative Family Therapy. 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Several APA and grammatical errors throughout. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable comments on my article. Below I will address each of your comments:

1. The biggest concern with the paper is that it does not clearly differentiate between issues that a marriage/long term committed relationship experiences and crises in a relationship.

Both of these categories affect structure, communication, and relationship satisfaction in a similar way—although they differ in intensity, which is why the categories are not clearly distinguished. I want to maintain a broader perspective, so I deliberately avoid a sharp distinction. Moreover, the purpose of the study does not require such a distinction.

2. Additionally, a significant amount of time is spent exploring elements of story-telling that are not immediately relevant to the practice of utilizing these strategies. 

In my opinion, the exploration of the elements of storytelling is essential in a scientific article because it enables a full understanding of the phenomenon, ensures terminological consistency, supports methodological precision, and provides a basis for further development of knowledge in the field.

3. Finally, the citations are not from current literature and there is a wealth of story-telling literature that is unexplored, particularly from Narrative Family Therapy. 

The article was enriched based on this literature.

Kind regards,

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I think this article is much better. The authors propose to make use of Biblical stories as guides for couples, and propose couples come together to tell their stories and create new stories for themselves in light of the biblical stories. This is clearly one way of using biblical stories. What this misses is that at the heart of the Christian gospel is that our stories, as couples, become part of the biblical story. We don't just use biblical stories as models, much like we would make use of great literary stories as models for us, but couples are called to 'make' the biblical story their own. However, even with this limitation, the article is suitable. It cannot be called Orthodox Christian, but it does fit under the larger umbrella of Christian. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable comment regarding the theological dimension of biblical narratives. I agree that Christian couples are called not merely to draw inspiration from biblical stories, but to participate in the story of salvation. In response to your suggestion, I have incorporated this dimension into the revised version of the article.

With regards,

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper submitted was more difficult to read. I appreciate the proposed changes were highlighted in red font. However, it was not always clear what text was going to be replaced. First, I recommend either (1) defining crises better and discussing more specifically how crises are narrative disruptions or (2) focus on general marital difficulties in narrative therapy terms. That is, the first 10 pages or so of the article describes general marital issues that any marriage therapist would regularly treat. The focus on crises frames the presentation of these concerns differently. Crises are often viewed as acute and external to the marriage. The main concerns discussed in the paper are common marriage therapy issues. Second, section 3.4 is the best part of the paper. The authors describe narrative therapy fairly well. This narrative view needs to be incorporated throughout the paper. How does narrative therapy define marriage? What is the purpose of marriage, and what role do narratives play in this purpose? How do these views impact crises or marital issues? Finally, more space needs to be given to the point of the article - how religious communities can support marriages (a narrative view of marriages) using stories and storytelling. Donald Capps (1998) wrote a book, "Living Stories: Pastoral Counseling in Congregational Context." This would be a valuable resource for this article.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your careful reading of the article and for your detailed and constructive comments. Below, I would like to respond to each of the points raised in your review:

1. Clarity of revisions and structure of the text
   Thank you for your comment regarding the marking of changes. I apologise for any confusion concerning which sections were replaced or modified. This is due to the extensive revisions made throughout the article.
2. Definition and characterisation of crises
   I agree that the concept of “crisis” requires further clarification. In response to your suggestion, the article has been reorganised in line with the first of the two proposed options. In the revised version, I have chosen to focus consistently on crises as narrative disruptions, following the framework of narrative therapy. This is supported by a more precise definition of crisis and a deeper explanation of how such events interrupt the continuity of a couple’s shared story.
3. Clarifying the narrative perspective throughout the article
   Thank you for your positive evaluation of section 3.4. Your observation concerning the need to more fully integrate the narrative approach to marriage has been taken into account. The article has been expanded to include responses to the following questions: How does narrative therapy define marriage? What is the purpose of marriage, and what role do narratives play in constructing and reconstructing marital relationships?
4. The role of religious communities and storytelling
   Thank you for the valuable bibliographic suggestion — Donald Capps’s Living Stories: Pastoral Counseling in Congregational Context has been incorporated as a significant source related to this theme. However, I have not expanded this section too extensively, in order to preserve the broader applicability of storytelling across various religious communities, including informal ones.

Once again, thank you for your insightful and thought-provoking feedback, which has contributed significantly to the improvement of the article.

Yours sincerely,

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed my concerns regarding this article.