SynthesisTrauma, violence & abuse2026
Defining Gaslighting in Gender-Based Violence: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Trauma, violence & abuse, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Workplace gaslighting in nursing practice: a concept analysis.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Narcissistic Abuse Cycle Deserves Clinical and Research Attention.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2025Article
- Workplace Gaslighting: Implications for Employees' Mental Health and Work Life in Greece.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In both public and academic discourse, gaslighting has gained increased attention, especially regarding psychological abuse, power imbalance, and gender-based violence (GBV). However, the term gaslighting is often inconsistently defined and conflated with broader forms of manipulation. It is also largely examined in the context of intimate partner violence (IPV), which ignores its occurrence in other forms of GBV. The present study presents a systematic review that synthesizes interdisciplinary academic literature to create a comprehensive framework of gaslighting. This framework includes the specific tactics that are used by perpetrators of gaslighting, the social-psychological outcomes experienced by survivors, and the role of systemic inequalities and social power dynamics. A search across multiple databases identified 96 records that discussed gaslighting in relation to GBV. Thematic analysis revealed a two-part framework for understanding gaslighting: (a) gaslighting tactics, which were categorized into cognitive and perceptual manipulation, emotional and psychological abuse, power dynamics and control, and additional forms of manipulation and (b) survivor outcomes, including disruptions to perception and memory, emotional distress, social isolation, and resistance strategies. The findings show that gaslighting is more than just an interpersonal act; it is sustained within social structures, where perpetrators use identity factors and forms of marginalization to exploit survivors. Overall, this review presents a comprehensive definition of gaslighting that illustrates its epistemic nature and its intersection with systemic oppression. It is suggested that future research studies gaslighting in GBV contexts beyond IPV, while practice and policy efforts should seek to enhance recognition and support for survivors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.