Making research more inclusive of all sexualities and genders does not need to be complicated. In surveys, using inclusive language for may only require small adaptations. For example, the language the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) uses for their National Intimate Partner Violence Survey (NISVS) is highly gendered. The intro to the questions about sexual violence states “Women and men may experience unwanted and uninvited sexual situations…” (Breiding, Smith and Basile, 2011). But instead of saying “Women and men…” the survey could say “Some people experience unwanted and uninvited sexual situations…” Small changes such as those would create a safer space for people who do not identify as a man or woman. Also, the use of qualitative research can help build a base of knowledge of IPV in the queer community. Focus groups, narrative analysis, in-depth interviews are appropriate when the subject of study is not already well-defined.

​

One example of qualitative methods that is useful is grounded theory. Walters advocates for grounded theory, because it involves the inductive development of theory from data. She states that grounded theory allows for “the identification of key constructs, relationships between constructs, along with the context and process in which these constructs occur” (254). Small, qualitative studies allow researchers to connect more intimately with the population they are studying. This allows the participants to help inform the process, which is especially important when a social phenomenon (such as the transgender rights movement) is still new, or when there has been very little research (e.g. IPV in LGBTQ+ communities). Qualitative research is often criticized for being biased, because the intimate nature of the study. Exceptional care must be taken to ask questions in non-leading ways, and the researcher must carefully code the responses objectively as possible when looking for patterns. Ultimately, there is no such thing as completely unbiased research, and a key concept of qualitative studies is the positionality of the researcher. Frequently qualitative researchers will state whether they are part of the social group they are studying, or what bias they may have. In this case, at least the reader of the article is aware, instead of naively believing there is no bias.